vr'2-6/o3 


Srom  t^e  £i6rairg  of 

Q$equeaf^e^  6g  ^im  fc 
t^c  feifirarg  of 

(prtnceton  i^eofogicaf  ^entinar^ 


SYLLABUS 


MESSL\NIC    PASSAGES 


OLD  TESTAMENT. 


O.  S.  STEARNS. 


BOSTON : 

PRESS    OF    PERCIVAL   T.   BARTLETT, 

105  SuMMKR  Street. 

1884. 


SYLLABUS  OF  THE  MESSIANIC  PASSAGES 

IN  THE 

OLD  TESTAMENT. 


MESSIANIC   TEXTS. 

EXPLANATION. 

By  Messianic  Texts  is  meant  such  passages  in  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures  as  seem,  when  fairly  interpreted, 
to  portray  one  or  more  characteristics  of  the  Christ  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  Hebrew  word  lUushiach,  "  anointed,'''' 
out  of  which  comes  by  transliteration  the  Greek  Messias, 
and  the  Greek  translation  of  which  is  Christos,  is  applied 
in  the  Old  Testament  to  kings^  and  priests^  who  were 
anointed  with  holy  oil,  and  thereby  dedicated  to  their 
official  position,  and  to  a  king-^  or  the  Jewish  nation*  as 
appointed  to  some  special  service,  but  its  application  in 
the  Old  Testament  to  the  ideal  king,  priest  and  prophet, 
whose  antitype  is  the  Christ  of  the  New  Testament,  is 
very  rare.  In  Ps.  ii.  2,  he  seems  to  be  so  designated.  In 
Dan.  ix.  25,  he  seems  to  be  referred  to  as  "  The  future 
One  as  high  priest  and  king  in  one  person."  Possibly 
there  is  a  reference  to  Him  in  1  Sam.  ii.  35.  The  term 
was  evidently  accepted  as  a  technical  one,  denoting  the 
Messiah,  par  excellence,  long  before  the  Christian  era. 
John  i.  41  ;  iv.  25. 

In  the  examination  of  some  of  these  texts,  it  will  be 
assumed  that  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  are  a  revela- 
tion from  God  to  man,  progressive  in  its  character  and 
redemptive  in  its  purpose.  It  will  also  be  assumed  that 
the  Hebrew  text  as  it  now  exists  is  our  best  source  of 

^  1  Sam.  xxiv.  7, 11 ;  2  Sam.  xxiii.  1.    ^  Lev.  iv.  3,  5, 16.    •  Isa.  xlv.  1.    -i  Hab.  iii.  13. 


information  on  this  subject.  Versions  and  Targums  will 
be  referred  to  as  subsidiary  aids.  It  will  likewise  be 
assumed  that  many  questions  raised  by  historical  criti- 
cism as  to  the  authorship  and  date  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  need  not  be  considered,  unless  they  evi- 
dently impinge  upon  or  nullify  the  apparent  meaning  of 
a  given  passage.  Whatever  the  age  of  a  book  quoted 
from  or  whoever  was  its  author,  it  antedated  the  Messiah 
who  was  to  come. 

GENERAL   DIVISION    OF   MESSIANIC    TEXTS. 

Delitzsch  in  his  "  Messianic  Prophecies,"*  says  :  "  In 
the  Old  Testament  the  Mediator  of  salvation  is  made 
known : 

(1}  As  the  Seed  of  the  Woman,  who  is  the  conqueror 
of  evil  in  mankind  ; 

(2)  As  the  Seed  of  the  Patriarchs,  who  is  the  blessing 
of  the  nations ; 

(3)  As  the  Seed  of  David,  who  is  the  salvation  and 
glory  of  Israel. 

In  the  New  Testament,  Christ  is  revealed  as  the  Son 
of  David,  who,  born  in  Israel,  seeks  the  lost  sheep  of  the 
house  of  Israel;  then  as  the  Seed  of  Abraham,  who, 
through  the  apostolic  preaching,  since  it  breaks  through 
the  old  barriers,  becomes  a  Blessing  to  the  nations ;  and 
finally,  as  the  Son  of  Man,  who,  as  the  conqueror  of  evil 
and  of  death,  sets  over  against  the  Adamic  race  a  new 
one,  born  of  God,  and  which  is  comprised  under  Him  as 
its  head."  To  unfold  such  a  division  of  Messianic  predic- 
tions, both  unique  and  suggestive,  would  carry  us  beyond 
our  present  purpose.  It  would  require  many  volumes  to 
do  it  justice.  Merely  as  a  help  to  the  memory,  we  may 
divide  the  texts  to  be  considered  into  three  classes:  those 
found  in  the  Pentateuch,  those  found  in  the  Psalms,  and 
those  found  in  the  Major  and  Minor  prophets.  Of  these, 
however,  only  the  more  important  ones  will  claim  our 
attention.! 

*  Chap.  6,  §  1. 

t  For  Messianic  Literature,  see  article  "  Messiah,"  in  Smith's  Bib.  Diet.,  Ap- 
pendix. 


PENTATEUCHAL   TEXTS. 

The  passages  in  the  Pentateuch  usually  referred  to  as 
expressing  the  Messianic  idea  are  Gen.  iii.  14-15 ;  ix.  26- 
27  ;  xii.  2-3 ;  xlix.  8-10  ;  Deut.  xviii.  15-19. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  four  of  these  are  in  the  book 
of  Genesis.  The  evident  purpose  of  the  other  books  of 
the  Pentateuch,  aside  from  their  historical  element,  is  to 
inculcate  and  explain  the  civil,  moral  and  ceremonial 
laws  of  a  select  nation,  out  of  which  Messiah  is  to  come  ; 
to  develop  minutely  the  Ten  Words,  or  Siuaitic  Law,  a 
true  apprehension  of  which  would  necessitate  the  redemp- 
tive work  of  the  Messiah  :  and  to  discipline  and  educate 
the  people  into  a  correct  idea  of  an  absolutely  holy  God, 
so  as  to  intensify  the  desire  for  a  Messianic  Redeemer. 
These  books,  therefore,  may  be  regarded  as  co-ordinate 
with  the  Messianic  idea,  and  so  far  as  the  ceremonial 
polity  is  concerned,  it  is  typical  of  that  idea.  But  in 
Genesis  we  have  a  sketch  of  the  early  history  of  the 
human  race,  as  well  as  of  the  origin  of  the  Jewish  nation  ; 
and  if  the  Messiah  is  to  be  for  the  well-being  of  mankind, 
we  naturally  expect  some  hint  of  that  fact.  And  accord- 
ingly we  tind  in  Genesis  the  thought  of  a  Messiah, 
shadowy  indeed,  yet  more  personal  iu  its  movement  than 
in  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  fact,  the  first 
three  chapters  of  Genesis  contain  the  essential  elements 
of  all  subsequent  revelation. 


THE   PROTEVANGELIUM. 

This  epithet  is  applied  to  Gen.  iii.  14-15.  The  passage 
has  been  deemed  Messianic  by  Jewish  tradition  and  by 
the  Christian  Church,  and  its  essential  thought  of  sin  and 
a  remedy  has  entered  into  the  religions  of  the  world.  See 
Lange  and  Kalisch,  on  Grenesis^  in  loco. 

LITERATURE. 

The  Beginnings  of  History.     F.  Lenormant. 
Origin  of  Nations.     G.  Rawlinson. 
Bib.  Sac.  vol.  38,  art.  by  W.  H.  Ward. 

Bib.  Sac.  vol.  40,  art.  by  Dillmauu,  trans,  by  Prof.  G.  H.  Whit- 
temore. 


6 

Bib.  Sac.  vol.  18,  art.  by  S.  C.  Bartlett  on  "  Theories  of  Messianic 
Prophecy." 

The  Messiah.     Art.  in  Ency.,  Brit.,  9th  edition. 
The  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture.     G.  T.  Ladd. 

EXEGESIS. 

Words.  The  word  rendered  "  bruise,"  in  A.  V.,  is 
derived  from  a  Hebrew  word,  which,  according  to  Fuerst, 
signifies  "to  pierce,"  "to  wound,"  "to  bruise,"  "to 
crush."  Gesenius  gives  as  a  definition  "to  pant  after," 
"  to  lie  in  wait  for."  The  only  parallel  passage  is  Job 
ix.  17,  where  it  cannot  signify  "  to  lie  in  wait."  Ps. 
cxxxix,  11.  is  sometimes  referred  to  as  containing  the 
word,  but  critics  generally  deem  the  word  there  an  errone- 
ous reading.  Delitzsch  says :  "  It  is  the  stereotyped  Tar- 
gum  word  for  '  to  crush.'  "  The  subject  of  the  verb,  in 
the  clause,  "  he  shall  bruise,  etc.,"  might  be  collective,  but 
the  usage  of  the  word  translated  '  seed,'  with  a  singular 
suffix,  would  indicate  the  personality  of  a  single  person. 
See  Bib.  Sac.  vol.  38,  art.  hy  R.  Uutcheson.  The  crucial 
part  of  the  passage  is  the  last  clause  of  vs.  15,  which  is  to 
be  translated  thus:  "He,"  i.e..,  the  seed  of  the  woman, 
"shall  bruise  thee  as  to  the  head;  and  thou,"  z.e.,  the  ser- 
pent, "shalt  bruise  him,"  i.e..,  the  woman's  seed,  "as  to  the 
heel."  So  Syr.  Sam.  version,  the  Targums  of  Pseudo- 
Jonathan,  and  Jerusalem.  The  Sept.  renders  the  verb 
"  to  bruise  "  by  "  to  watch  for."  Paul  in  Romans  xvi.  20, 
renders  it  "to  bruise."  The  Roman  Catholic  interpre- 
ters, without  textual  authorit}^  make  the  subject  of  the 
verb  feminine,  and  refer  it  to  the  Virgin  Mary. 

The  surface  thought  of  the  verse  would  be  this: 
there  shall  be  perpetual  enmity  between  the  serpent 
and  the  woman,  and  between  her  seed  and  his  seed ;  but 
the  seed  of  the  woman  (pronoun  emphatic)  shall  bruise 
or  crush  the  serpent  and  his  seed  on  the  head,  the  most 
vital  part,  and  the  serpent  and  his  seed  shall  bruise  or 
crush  her  seed  on  the  heel,  the  less  vital  part.  In  a  word, 
the  conflict  between  the  two  parties  will  result  in  a  victory 
for  the  woman's  seed.  There  seems  to  be  also  in  the  lan- 
guage the  idea  of  immediate  instinctive  resistance  on  the 
part  of  the  woman's  seed,  like  the  spontaneous  effort  to 
crush  the  serpent's  head  when  one  is  bitten  on  the  heel. 


REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  The  language  itself,  and  by  itself,  would 
simply  express  the  divine  assertion  that,  in  consequence 
of  the  violation  of  God's  law,  by  our  first  parents,  there 
should  be  a  mutual  hatred  between  the  human  race  and 
the  serpent  race.  Such  has  been  essentially  the  fact 
in  human  history,  generally  accounted  for  as  the  result  of 
instinct,  education,  or  tradition. 

Remark  2.  But  the  occasion  which  called  out  such  a 
declaration  would  seem  to  demand  much  more  than  such 
a  trite  thought.  Man's  disobedience,  with  its  sad  conse- 
quences, calls  for  a  ray  of  hope  to  the  soul  rather  than  to 
the  body. 

Remark  3.  Hence  the  Scriptures  assign  the  tempta- 
tion to  an  agent  acting  through  the  serpent.  This  may 
not  be  found  in  explicit  passages,  because  in  no  passage  is 
the  scene  of  the  temptation  minutely  described  or 
unfolded.  But  (a)  Satan,  as  the  foe  of  man,  with  per- 
sonal attributes,  is  spoken  of  in  Job  i.  6-13  ;  Zech.  iii.  1-3  ; 
Matt.  iv.  (i)  Satan  is  represented  as  the  enemy  of  God 
and  of  Christ,  and  as  the  Prince  of  a  Kingdom  of  dark- 
ness. John  xii.  31 ;  2  Cor.  iv.  4.  (c)  Satan,  as  the  prime 
cause  of  evil,  is  referred  to  in  Rev.  xii.  9 ;  and,  if  we  add 
to  these  passages,  2  Cor.  xi.  3,  and  Rom.  xvi.  20,  the 
agency  of  Satan  through  the  serpent  is  scripturally  con- 
clusive. 

Remark  4.  The  passage  under  consideration  may, 
therefore,  be  fairly  considered  Messianic,  as  unfolded  by 
subsequent  revelations,  (a)  We  cannot  determine  with 
certainty  the  exact  meaning  of  the  passage  as  understood 
by  Adam  and  Eve.  It  sounded  the  note  of  victory,  but 
the  medium  of  the  victory  is  left  indefinite.  Even  a  pic- 
ture, however,  is  a  teacher  of  fundamental  truth.  (6)  As 
already  said,  the  pronoun  "  he,"  "  he  shall  bruise,"  etc., 
may  be  collective  or  individual.  If  collective,  the  passage 
when  scripturally  considered,  would  be  a  prophecy  of  the 
antagonism  and  victory  of  a  peculiar  race  with  an  antagon- 
izing race,  the  family  of  God  and  the  family  of  Satan.  If 
individual,  which  is  possible,  it  would  express  the  antag- 
onism and  victory  of  the  head  of  a  given  class  as  opposed 
to  the  head  of  an  opposing  class ;  or,  by  the  subsequent 


development  of  revelation,  Christ  and  Satan.  (<?)  The 
passage  may  therefore  be  considered  as  essentially  and 
generically  Messianic. 

OBJECTIONS. 

1.  It  is  objected  to  the  above  interpretation  that  the 
scene  in  the  garden  of  Eden,  as  described  in  Gen.  iii,  is 
mythical.  But  the  language  of  Scripture  elsewhere,  espe- 
cially in  its  use  of  similar  imagery,  implies  a  literal  transac- 
tion. («)  From  it  as  a  seed  the  whole  history  of  man 
develops  from  Adam  to  Christ,  as  a  literal  account ;  so 
that,  scripturally  considered,  the  genealogy  of  Christ  in 
Matt.  i.  might  as  well  be  termed  mythical.  (6)  The 
scene  in  the  garden  is  frequently  referred  to  in  both  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments  as  an  historical  event.  When 
the  prophets  refer  to  it,  the  Masoretic  text  has  been  care- 
ful so  to  point  the  word  as  to  guard  against  any  mistake 
as  to  its  local  meaning.  For  the  Old  Testaments  see  Gen. 
xiii.  10  ;  Isa.  li.  3  ;  Eze.  xxviii.  13  ;  xxxi.  9  ;  Joel  ii.  3  ;  Job 
xxxi.  33.  For  the  New  Testament,  see  Matt.  xix.  2-5 ; 
2  Cor.  xi.  3  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  13-14  ;  Rom.  xvi.  20;  Rom.  v.  12-18, 
the  last  passage  tracing  minutely  the  analogy  between 
Adam  and  Christ,  (e)  It  gives  us  the  only  known  origin 
of  the  human  race.  This  would  imply  that  the  narrator 
intended  to  speak  of  a  literal  transaction. 

2.  It  is  objected  to  the  Messianic  application  of  this 
passage  that  the  scene  in  the  garden  is  allegorical.  To 
this  it  may  be  replied  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  lan- 
guage itself  to  imply  such  an  interpretation.  No 
unbiased  exegete  would  so  interpret  the  language  by 
itself.  He  may  indulge  that  opinion  when  he  attempts  to 
explain  the  how  of  the  recorded  narrative,  but  such  an 
interpretation  is  merely  the  insertion  of  his  opinion.  It 
is  not  exegesis.  Were  we  sure,  however,  that  the  lan- 
guage was  allegorical,  it  would  not  annul  the  essential 
facts ;  for  even  allegory,  to  be  consistent  allegory,  must 
rest  on  well-authenticated  facts.  The  story  of  Dives  and 
Lazarus,  by  some  critics  is  called  an  allegory.  The 
facts,  however,  remain  the  same,  be  it  so  or  not.  As  Pro- 
fessor Conant  says  in  his  *■'■  Genesis  with  Notes'':  "In 
regard  to  the  tempter's  mode  of  communication  with  Eve, 


9 

it  matters  not  whether  we  suppose  the  serpent  to  have 
appeared  visibly,  and  in  actual  bodily  form,  to  the  eye  of 
Eve,  addressing  her  in  audible  words,  or  that  the  commu- 
nication was  purely  mental,  the  tempter  appearing  in  this 
form  to  the  mind  of  Eve."  "  The  reality  of  the  transac- 
tion, as  viewed  by  our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  is  not 
affected  by  interpreting  the  whole  passage  as  an  embodi- 
ment of  great  moral  truths  in  sensible  imager}',  in  order 
to  make  them  more  readily  intelligible  to  all  degrees  of 
intellectual  culture,  and  to  give  thera  a  stronger  hold 
upon  the  mind."  This  view  would  be  termed  the  sym- 
bolical method  of  interpretation,  against  which  there  are 
few  if  any  objections. 


NOACHIAN   PROPHECY. 

GEN.  IX.  25-27. 

The  position  of  this  prophecy  in  the  sacred  record  is 
very  suggestive.  The  bow  of  promise,  as  the  symbol  of 
preservation  to  man's  physical  life,  beautifully  associates 
itself  with  the  word  of  promise  for  the  preservation  of 
man's  spiritual  life.  This  promise  is  enclosed  in  a  special 
benediction  upon  Shem.  The  term  employed  in  this 
benediction,  Jehovah-Elohim,  includes  the  idea  of  God  as 
Creator  and  Governor,  and  that  of  special  Revealer  and 
special  Covenanter.  The  choice  of  this  term,  as  the  text 
now  stands,  for  the  blessing  upon  Shem,*  which  term  is 
omitted  in  the  blessing  upon  Japhet,  and  the  marked 
curse  pronounced  upon  Canaan,  the  son  of  Ham,  shuts  in 
Shem  as  the  head  of  a  people  upon  whom  and  through 
whom  the  world  was  to  be  blessed.  It  expresses  as 
much  as  this:  that  "because  Jehovah  is  the  God  of 
Shem,  Shem  will  be  the  recipient  and  heir  of  all  the 
blessings  of  salvation  which  God,  as  Jehovah,  bestows 
u[)()n  uumkind."  DelitzHch  Com.  on  Genesis.  Even  Tuch, 
belonging  to  a  less  conservative  school  of  critics,  says, 
referring  to  the  clause,  ''And  Japhet  shall  dwell  in  the 

*  See,  for  a  somewhat  similar  usage,  Geu.  xiv.  20;  Ex.  xviii.  10;  2  Sam.  rviii.  28. 


10 

tents  of  Shem " :  "This  declaration  goes  back  to  the 
united  act  of  Hlial  piety  of  both  brothers,  and  is  intended 
to  represent  the  ideal  union  in  which,  at  a  subsequent 
time,  their  posterity  sliali,  as  their  progenitors  now,  be 
united  for  a  higher  c^bject.  That  is  here  first  indicated  in 
a  more  general  way,  which  is  distinctly  declared  in  the 
subsequent  history,  cliap.  xii.  3,  that  the  salvation  of  all 
nations  shall  proceed  from  the  offspring  of  Shem,  who,  in 
making  Zion  the  common  centre  of  their  efforts,  shall, 
without  distraction,  be  united  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord.'' 
Quoted  from  Bib.  Sac.  vol.  8,  p.  60.  The  passage,  there- 
fore, may  be  accepted  as  ge.nerically  Messianic. 

LITEUATURE. 

Hen.£rstenber.a's  Cliristolojry,  vols.  1,  2. 

"  Eeilin^e  ziir  Erklariiii,y;-  iles  alteii  Testamentes," 

Lawr.  Keiiike,  vol.  4,  i)p.  3  107.     "Vi^ry  exhanstive. 

Scliatt's  Laiiiie,  in  luro,  tliu  liilk'st  of  the  Corns,  ou  the  passage. 

Bil)   «ac.  vols.  12,  13.  aits,  by  G.  P,.  Cheever. 

Bib.  Sac.  vol.  8,  uit.  by  R.  D.  C.  Robbius. 

GENERAL   EXEGESIS. 

The  text,  as  it  now  is,  is  obscure.  If,  as  critics 
assert,  it  is  a  combination  of  parts  of  the  Jehovistic  and 
Elohistic  documents,  by  a  Redactor  (^Dillmanin),  his  work 
is  certainly  not  to  be  praised.  Seemingly,  a  Redactor 
would  have  sought  to  leave  his  mark  of  perspicuity  upon 
the  patch.  That  the  translators  of  the  several  versions 
and  the  paraphrasts  were  compelled  to  use  the  text  as  it 
now  stands  is  evident,  for  they  vary  in  tlieir  translations 
and  paraphrases  just  as  any  tyro  in  Hebrew  would  do  at 
the  present  da}-.  Thus  in  vs.  25,  "  to  his  brethren  "  nat- 
urally means  those  of  the  same  race,  i.e.,  that  Canaan 
shall  t)e  a  "servant  of  servants"  to  the  Hamitic  race,  or 
the  Hebrew  word  for  "brothers"  may  have  a  broader  sig 
niHcation,  so  as  to  express  the  servitude  of  C.  to  the 
Semitic  and  Japhetic  races.  In  the  26th  vs.,  "And  let 
Canaan  be  a  servant  to  him,"  (A.  V.)  the,  pronoun*  may 
be  plural  or  collective,  i.e..,  "  to  them,"  i.e.,  Shem  and 
Japhet.     In  vs.  27,  the  subject  of  the  verb  "to  dwell," 

*  Usnsre  assigns  to  Inmo  a  collcrtivc  or  plural  meaning;  yet  see  Ps.  xi.  7;  Job 
xxii.  11;  Isa.  xliv.  15;  (Jcs.  §  1U3  marginal  note. 


n 

may  be  Elohiin,  or  Japhet,  giving  the  idea  of  a  specially 
repeated  favor  to  Shem,  in  lieu  of  the  common  interpreta- 
tion that  Japhet  is  to  occupy  the  tents  of  Shem.  An 
expanded  transhition  of  the  passage  will  make  these  dif- 
ferences more  ap[)arent.  Vs.  25,  "-And  He  said,  Cursed  ■' 
be  Canaan  ;  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be  to  his 
brothers,"  i.e.^  those  of  liis  own  Hamitic  race,  or  those  of  ^ 
all  the  races.  Vs.  26,  ''And  He  said.  Blessed  be  Jehovah, 
the  God  of  Shem  ;  and  let  Canaan  l)e  a  servant  to  him, 
or  them,"  i.e.^  to  Shem,  the  Semitic  race,  or  to  the  Semitic 
and  Japhetic  races.  Vs.  27,  "May  God  enlarge  Japhet; 
and  may  ^'He,'"  or  "  7ig,"  z.e.,  God  or  Japhet,  "dwell  in  the 
tents  of  Shem  ;  and  let  Canaan  be  a  servant  to  them  ;  "  i.e.^ 
Japhet  and  Shem ;  or  "  to  Jam"  i.e.,  Siiem.  In  other  words,  * 
guided  merely  by  the  text,  its  possibilities  allow  the  servi- 
tude of  Canaan  to  be  ^mited  to  the  Hamitic  race,  or 
enlarged  to  a  servitude  CDnnected  with  the  Semitic  and 
Japhetic  races.  The  history  of  Canaan,  so  far  as  is 
known,  verifies  this  language  of  Noah  essentially  accord- 
ing to  either  inteipretation. 


THE    BLESSING    UPON   ABEAJVI. 

Gen.  xii.  3. 

The  chapter  which  contains  this  prophecy  is  a  transi- 
tion chapter  from  universal  history  to  national  history. 
Previously,  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  we  have  a  sketcli  of  ■ 
the  origin  of  the  world,  the  origin  of  the  human  raogf  th^ 
origin  of  hope  to  the  race  subsequent  to  the  fall,  and  tlie 
selection  of  one  of  the-  sons  of  Noah,  as  the  channel  of 
this  hope  to  the  postdiluvian  woi'ld.  Now,  from  one  of 
the  descendants  of  Shem,  the  favored  son  of  Noah,  a  selec- 
tion is  made,  through  whom  "all  the  families  of  the  earth 
shall  be  blessed."  Abram,  as  one  of  the  descendants  of 
Shem,  thus  becomes  the  trust  in  whom  rests  the  hope  of 
the  world.  The  i^tory  of  redemption  is  thus  nari'owino- 
itself  into  the  history  of  an  individual.  As  Kalisch 
{Com.  in  loco)  says:  "This  is  the  Hebrew  writer's 
avowed  principle,  and  henceforth  he  devotes  his  narrative 
exclusively  to  the  destinies  of  that  race." 


V 


12 


LITERATURE. 


Bib.  Sac.  vol.  11,  art.  by  E.  P.  Barrows. 
Bib.  Sac.  vol.  22,  art.  by  Samuel  Harris. 

EXEGESIS. 

The  last  clause  of  the  verse  is  as  universal  as  the  lan- 
guage can  express.  All  the  families  of  the  earth  shall  be 
blessed,  in  connection  with  or  by  means  of  the  Abram, 
who,  in  the  previous  verse,  is  selected  as  the  head  of  a 
great  nation.  "  I  will  make  of  thee  a  great  nation,  and  I 
will  bless  thee,  and  I  will  surely  make  thy  name  great." 
The  word  translated  "•  shall  be  blessed  "  is  Niphal,  and 
by  some  is  considered  reflexive,  i.e.,  "shall  bless  them- 
selves," ?.e.,  make  him  the  beau  ideal  of  the  greatest 
blessedness,  which  in  his  name  they  invoke  upon  them- 
selves. Ps.  Ixxii.  17  ;  Isa.  Ixv.  1^.  But  usage,  with  some 
exceptions,  requires  that  when  a  verb  in  Kal  is  transitive, 
and  an  Hithpael  is  likewise  in  use,  the  Niphal  should  be 
construed  as  passive.*  Besides,  the  word  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  imperative  of  Niphal,  which  would  imply  its 
usual  passive  use.  The  preposition  "in"  (in  him)  is  in- 
strumental, ^.e.,  by  means  of  him,  with  the  additional  idea 
of  unity  as  a  source,  i.e.,  Abram  is  to  be  both  the  medium 
and  the  source  of  this  blessedness.  In  the  clause,  "All  the 
families  of  the  earth,"  strictly  "all  the  families  of  the 
so^7,"  perhaps  the  selection  of  the  word  reflects  upon  the 
origin  of  man,  and  the  curse  upon  the  ground.  Else- 
where, Gen.  xviii.  18,  the  more  common  phrase  is  found ; 
i.e.,  "All  the  nations  of  the  earth.^''  By  "families  of  the 
earth  "  is  meant  the  division  of  the  human  race  into  fami- 
lies, i.e.,  the  whole  human  race.  Gen.  x.  5;  xxviii.  14.  In 
Gen.  xxii.  18,  we  have,  instead  of  "  in  thee,"  "  in  thy  seec?." 
So  also  in  xxvi.  14,  which  repeats  the  blessing  to  Isaac, 
and  in  xxviii.  14,  that  upon  Jacob.  The  words  trans- 
lated, "  to  curse,"  in  the  first  clause  of  the  verse,  are  dis- 
tinct in  meaning.  In  the  first  instance,  the  word  means 
the  reproaches  and  blasphemous  curses  of  man ;  in  the 
second,  the  judicial  curse  of  God. —  Keil.  The  verse  as 
thus  explained,  may  be  expanded  thus :  And  I  will  surely 
bless,  i.e.,  let  my  benediction  rest  upon  those  who  bless, 

*  Nord.  §  141,  notes.  Ges.  §  51,  2,  p.  130.  Gr.  §  80,  2,  2. 


13 

or  let  their  benediction  rest  npon  thee  and  thy  seed ;  and 
I  will  judicially  curse  those  who  reproach  or  blaspheme 
thee  and  thy  seed ;  and  in  connection  with  thee  as  the 
head  of  a  peculiar  race,  thon  being  the  human  source,  all 
the  families  of  the  ground,  i.e.,  the  whole  human  family 
shall  be  partakers  of  my  benediction. 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  The  prophec}''  teaches  the  universality  of 
a  divine  blessing,  emanating  from  Abram.  It  is  as  broad 
and  catholic  as  any  kindred  assertion  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. It  harmonizes  with  the  Messianic  passages  in  Ps. 
xxii.  28,  and  Ixxii.  17,  and  with  its  verification  as  affirmed 
in  Acts  iii.  25 ;  Gal.  iii.  8  9. 

Remark  2.  According  to  the  testimony  of  Christ, 
Abram  received  the  propliecy  as  forecasting  a  Messi- 
anic era.  John  viii.  56.  Tliis  language  in  John  can- 
not properly  refer  to  any  vision  of  Ciirist  in  Heaven, 
because,  {a)  It  was  the  custom  of  Christ  to  reason  from 
Scripture,  and  out  of  Scripture,  to  prove  his  assertions. 
(6)  The  objection  of  his  hearers  was  to  the  fact  and  to  the 
fact  alone,  (c)  The  reply  of  Christ  to  their  cavil  is  an 
appeal  to  the  fact.  The  passage  affirms  that  Abraham  saw 
the  day  of  Christ, .not  necessaiil}''  his  person,  except  so  far 
as  that  person  might  be  concealed  in  the  Jehovah  or  the 
Angel  of  Jehovah,  but  the  day  of  Christ,  the  period  when 
his  mission  should  be  put  into  execution.  He  rejoiced,  he 
exulted  in  the  activity  of  his  faith,  with  strong,  longing 
spirit,  to  see  the  Messianic  era,  with  its  blessings.  See 
Ellicot,  PJiil.  i.  6-10  ;  Meyer,  and  Westcott,  on  John  viii.  5l). 

Revnark  3.  According  to  the  Scriptures,  Abraham 
is  the  head  of  a  race  of  believers  in  tlie  Messiah,  and  a 
type  of  Christ.  Rom.  iv.  11 ;  Gal.  iii.  16.  On  tlie  latter 
passage.  Dr.  Hackett  says :  ^  The  Apostle  does  not  refer 
to  any  particular  passage  which  contains  the  words,  but 
avails  himself  of  this  brief  mode  of  speaking,  as  a  conven- 
ient formula  for  summing  up  the  entire  teaching  of  Scrip- 
ture on  this  subject.  It  is  as  if  he  had  said,  "-Search  the 
Scriptures  from  Genesis  to  Malachi,  thej'  are  of  one  strain  ; 
they  make  no  mention  of  a  plurality  of  seeds  ;  the}'  speak 
of  a  single  seed   only,  the  believing  race,  who  are  like 


14 

Abraham  in  his  faith.  Christ  here  represented  his  peo- 
ple as  being  in  Him."  The  passage,  Gen.  xii.  3,  may 
therefore  be  accepted  as  generieally  and  sjjiritualli/  Mes- 
sianic. Abi'aham,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  was  to  be 
the  father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the 
flesh  (Matt.  i.  1),  and  the  father  of  all  true  believers  in 
Christ.     Gal.  iii.  16. 


THE   BLESSING   OF   ISAAC    UPON    JACOB. 

GEN.  XXVII.  27-29. 

Of  this  prophecy  as  a  connecting  liidv  between  that 
given  by  God  to  Abraham,  and  that  given  b}^  Jacob  to 
his  sons,  the  exphination  of  Delitzsch  is  so  clear  and  com- 
prehensive, I  quote  the  entire  section.  3Iess.  Prophs.,  ch. 
vii.,  §  8. 

"  It  is  the  promise  respecting  the  benediction  of  the 
nations  through  the  seed  of  the  patriarclis,  and  therefore 
of  the  completion  of  the  divine  work  which  the  patriarchs 
bestow  as  a  blessing  upon  their  first-born,  since  they  thus 
make  them  bearers  of  the  great  promised  blessing,  and 
mediums  of  the  preparation  for  its  fulfilment.  Isaac  is 
Abraham's  first  and  only  son  by  Sarah,  and  hence  entitled 
to  the  reception  of  this  blessing.  Jacob  snatches  away 
the  blessing  of  the  first-born,  which  belonged  to  Esau,  and 
even  retains  it,  but  only  as  he  atones  for  the  sin  connected 
with  the  act,  and  obtains  it  anew  from  Jehovah  by  wrest- 
liAg  in  prayer  and  tears.  The  blessing  of  the  first-born 
(Gen.  xxvii.  27-29)  consists  of  four  parts,  in  which  Jacob 
is  promised : 

(1)  The  possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  under  the 
divine  benediction  (vs.  27^,  28):  "See,  the  smell  of  my 
son  is  as  the  smell  of  a  field  which  Jehovah  has  blessed  ; 
and  God  will  give  thee  of  the  dew  of  Heaven,  and  of  the 
fatness  of  the  land,  and  plenty  of  corn  and  must" ; 

(2)  The  subjection  of  the  nations  to  such  an  extent 
that  every  limitation  is  contrary  to  the  words  of  the  text, 
(vs.  29  a):  "  Peoples  shall  servcthee  and  nations  shall  bow 
down  to  thee  :  " 


15 

(3)  The  primacy  over  his  brothers,  tliat  is  over  those 
blood-rehitions,  whose  postejity.  were  outside  tlie  line  of 
promise  (vs.  29  b):  '"Be  hn-d  over  thy  biethren,  and  let 
thy  mother's  sons  bow  down  to  thee  ;  " 

(4)  So  high  a  positi(m  in  redemptive  history,  that 
blessings  and  curses  are  conditioned  by  the  relation  which 
men  take  to  him  who  has  received  the  blessing  (vs.  29  f): 
"Cursed  be  tiiey  tluit  curse  thee,  and  blessed  be  they  that 
bless  thee."  Compare  Gen.  xii.  3,  and  Num.  xxiv.  9,  which 
is  referred  to  the  people  of  Israel.  This  fourth  part  shows 
that  it  is  the  same  promise,  received  by  Abraham,  which 
Isaac  bestows  upon  Jacob.  Its  goal  is  Christ.  Tlie  prom- 
ise extends  to  the  nations,  and  even  shortly  becomes 
national,  and  so  Messianic.  For  Jacob's  twelve  sons  form 
the  transition  from  the  family  to  the  people  of  promise." 


THE  BLESSING  OF  JACOB  UPON  JUDAH. 

GEN.  XLIX.  8-12. 
LITERATURE. 

Turner's  A  Companion  to  the  Boole  of  Genesis. 

Wiijilit's  Tlie  15ook  of  Genesis  in  Hebrew. 

'I'ueli's  Geni'.'iis.     Very  Tiill. 

Knobel's  Genesis  for  nionoijraplis. 

Kurtz's  Histoiy  of  tiie  Old  Covenant,  vol.  2. 

Clieyue's  Tropliecies  of  Isaiali.     Essay  4. 

BRIEF    EXEGESIS. 

An  analysis  of  vss.  8-10  gives  three  characteristics : 

1.  Judah's  preeminence  over  his  brothers,  and  his 
victory  over  his  enemies.     Vs.  8. 

2.  Judah  as  the  lion-hearted,  courageous  son,  and  to 
be  increasingly  so.     Vs.  9. 

3.  The  perpetuity  of  his  preeminence.     Vs.  10. 
Verse  10th  is  the  crucial  verse,  and  the  meaning  of 

two  of  its  words  is  doubtful.  They  are  Mlihokek  and 
ShUoh.  The  former  in  Dent,  xxxiii.  21 ;  Isa.  xxxiii.  22, 
and  Ps.  Ix.  9,  seems  to  mean  lawgiver  or  governor,  but 


16 

most  critics  prefer  here  the  translation  "'•staff,"  corres- 
ponding with  sceptre,  as  the  synibol  of  royalty,  the  pic- 
ture being  that  of  a  king  on  his  throne  leaning  on  his 
staff  or  sceptre,  which  is  between  his  feet.  Num.  xxi.  18. 
See  Layard's  Ni7ieveh.  The  form  of  the  word  is  active 
and  intensive,  and  its  usage  implies  either  an  actor  or  the 
impersonation  of  an  actor.  The  view  of  Gesenius  the  Sept. 
and  Onkelos,  that  the  phrase  in  which  it  stands  signifies 
2i  royal  descendant^  has  much  in  its  favor.  The  second 
word  may  be  derived  from  a  Lameth  He  verb,  signifying 
'to  be  tranquil,'  '  to  be  at  ease,'  'to  be  restful,'  or  from  an 
unused  Ayin  Vav  verb,  signifying  '  to  hang  from  the 
shoulders  as  a  garment,'  'to  rest,'  but  the  difficulty  in  the 
use  of  the  word  does  not  lie  in  its  derivation  so  fai  as 
meaning  is  concerned.  The  older  critics  supposed  it  was 
an  Aramaic  combination  of  the  relative  and  its  anteced- 
ent, i.e.,  'whose  it  is,'  but  for  such  a  contraction  we  have 
no  pentateuchal  usage.  The  supposed  correspondence  in 
Gen.  vi.  3  is- now  ruled  out.*  And  the  common  reference 
to  Eze.  xxi.  32,  as  a  parallel  instance  of  such  combination, 
or  as  expository  of  this  word,  has  little  authority.  That 
passage,  however,  is  doubtless  Messianic.  The  word  is 
either  a  personal,  descriptive  name,  or  a  local  name.  The 
verb  connected  with  it  ma}^  have  this  word  for  its  subject, 
or  he,  i.e.,  Judah,  may  be  the  subject.  The  renderings 
"  until  he  comes  to  Shiloh,"  or  "  until  Shiloh  comes,"  are 
possible,  grammatically.  The  word  in  A.  V.,  translated 
"  gatherinar,"  "  unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of  the  people 
be,"  should  be  translated  'obedience'  or  'submission.' 
Prov.  XXX.  17.  The  tenth  verse,  which  is  the  chief  one 
now  in  question,  may  be  translated  thus :  "  The  sceptre 
shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  the  staff  (of  ro3^alty) 
from  between  his  feet  (or  royalty  itself)  until  Shiloh  come, 
or  until  he  comes  to  Shiloh." 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  It  is  well  to  consider  this  very  difficult 
text  subjectively,  historically,  and  by  way  of  verification. 

Remark  2.  Considered  suhjectively,  a  priori  to  a 
believer  in  a  divine  revelation,  there  can   be  no  objection 

See  Gr.  §  74-a 


u 

to  its  Messianic  character,  if  fairly  it  can  be  so  interpreted. 
For  (a)  Jacob  liad  been  ])reviously  the  recipient  of  divine 
revehitions,  some  of  which  referred  to  him  as  the  progeni- 
tor of  a  select  people  through  whom  the  human  nice  was 
to  be  blessed.  Gen.  xxviii.  14.  (6)  Jacob  had  been  made 
acquainted  with  the  prophecies  given  to  his  ancestors  on 
the  same  subject.  Gen.  xxxi.  54  ;  xxxi.  42  ;  xxxii.  10.  (c) 
The  selection  of  Judah,  the  lion-hearted,  liaruionizes  with 
the  condition  of  Jacob's  family  at  this  time.  Reuben,  the 
first-born,  and  Simeon  and  Levi,  his  successors,  had  for- 
feited their  claim  to  the  rights  of  primogeniture,  and  as  a 
consequence  to  any  typical  position  as  the  head  of  a 
spiritual  race.  The  glowing  blessing  upon  Joseph  (xlix. 
22-26),  according  to  1  Chron.  v.  1,  transferred  to  him  the 
honors  of  the  birthright,  and  if  to  anyone  the  primacy  of 
leadership  (I  Chron.  v.  2),  and  the  blessing  would  be  the 
gift  to  Judah  as  the  fourth  son.  (d)  We  naturally 
expect,  according  to  the  law  of  progress,  that,  from  the 
selection  of  a  patriarch  in  whom  the  general  blessing 
rested,  we  should  pass  to  an  individual  of  that  family,  to 
whom  a  special  personal  blessing  should  be  confided. 
Antecedently,  therefore,  we  may  justly  look  for  the  Mes- 
sianic to  assume  in  this  passage  a  personal  or  tribal  char- 
acter. 

Remark  3.  Historically  considered,  (a)  more  mono- 
graphs have  been  written  upon  the  poem  in  which  this 
prophecy  is  found  than  upon  any  other  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. See  Tuch,  §  570.  (6)  The  word  Shiloh,  as  referring 
to  a  personal  Messiah,  was  the  generally  accepted  view 
until  several  centuries  after  the  Christian  era.  The  Sept., 
the  purest  part  of  which  is  the  Pentateuch,  date  about 
280  B.C.,  reads,  "  Until  He  come  for  whom  these  things 
are  reserved."  In  the  Peshito,  Syriac,  date  between  the 
first  and  second  centuries  A.D.,  we  have,  "  Until  He 
come  whose  it  is."  In  the  Sam.  Pent.,  date  uncertain,  the 
verse  corresponds  with  the  '  Textus  Receptus.'  The  ver- 
sion of  Onkelos,  date  probably  about  2nd  century  A.D., 
{DeutscJis  Literary  Remains,  art.  Targums)^  reads, 
"  Until  the  Messiah  come,  whose  the  kingdom  is."  In 
the  Targum  of  Jerusalem  of  the  7th  century  A.D.,  we 
have,    ''Until    Shiloh   come,    King    Messiah,    whose    the 


IS 

kingdom  is."  See  more  in  Turner's  A  Companion  to 
the  Book  of  Genesis,  (c)  Gesenius  in  the  early  edition 
of  his  lexicon,  and  Fuerst  in  his  early  concordance,  assign 
personality  to  the  word  Sidluh.  Tlie  later  editions  give 
it  a  local  meaning,  the  Shiloh  where  the  ark  was  placed 
as  the  centre  of  national  worship.  The  early  authorities 
are  therefore  essentially  agreed  in  deeming  the  passage 
Messianic. 

Remark  4.  The  heading  to  the  poem,  "The  end  of 
days,"  as  in  the  fifteen  other  passages,  seems  to  be_  an 
ideal  terminus,  limited  as  to  its  scope  by  the  seer's  vision, 
corresponding  to  '■'•  In  the  last  days  "  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Here  it  might  be  the  occupation  of  Canaan,  or 
that  as  typical  of  a  grander  event.  See  Kurtz'  Hist,  of 
the  Old  Covenant,  vol.  2,  p.  31. 

Remark  5.  'J'he  word  Shiloh,  written  fully  or  defec- 
tively, in  every  other  instance  in  tlie  Old  Testament,  is 
used  for  the  town  Shiloh.  Here,  as  already  stated,  it  may 
be  the  subjeit  of  the  verb  '•  to  come,"  or  a  local  accusa- 
tive, "until  Shiloh  comes,"  or  "until  he  comes  to  Shiloh." 
We  have  no  proof  that  such  a  place  was  known  to  Jacob, 
and  we  have  none  that  such  was  not  the  case.  The  place 
may  have  taken  its  name  from  its  historical  origin,  as  the 
central  place  of  worship,  or  it  may  not.  Judah,  as  the 
leading  tribe,  the  van  of  the  wUderness  army,  and  perliaps 
during  the  Canaanitish  wars,  came  to  Shiloh  as  truly  as 
did  the  rest,  and  in  al!  probability  as  the  leader  of  the 
rest.  The  statement  of  a  writer  in  the  Methodist  Quar- 
terly. 1869,  p.  419,  that  "In  the  numerous  battles 
recorded  in  Jcshiia  previous  to  the  coming  to  Shiloh,  not 
a  word  is  said  about  Jndah's  taking  the  lead,"  is  an  argu- 
ment e  silentio,  which  is  to  be  treated  cautiously.  His 
piior  position  as  leader,  ])resupposes  his  subsequent  lead- 
ership, unless  his  removal  from  it  is  historically  stated. 
See  Kum.  ii.  3 ;  x.  14 ;  Josh.  xv.  1 ;  Judges  i.  2;  xx.  18. 

Remark  6.  The  facts,  therefore,  seem  to  leave  the 
personal  ^Ies^ianic  signification  of  this  passage,  at  best, 
uncertain.  But  if  we  take  it  as  tribal  and  typical,  verified 
in  the  first  instance,  as  an  epoch  in  Israel,  Josh,  xviii.  1, 
when  tlie  land  being  subdued,  "  the  tabernacle  of  the  cov- 
enant was  pitched"  there,  and  Judah  was  the  leading 


19 

tribe,  it  takes  on  a  sufficiently  Messianic  character,  to  har- 
monize with  Rev.  v.  5,  and  is  illustrated  by  the  motto  on 
the  well-known  standard  of  Judah,  under  a  lion's  whelp: 
"•Rise  u[),  Jehovah,  and  let  thine  enemies  be  scattered." 

Remark  7.  As  to  its  historical  verification,  if  we 
criticise  the  prophecy  minutely,  and  require  that  royalty 
in  its  kingly  personality  should  be  pre-^erved  in  the 
house  of  Judah  until  the  appearing  of  Christ,  it  can- 
not easily  be  sustained.  Lawgiving  as  such,  of  course, 
was  in  the  hands  of  Moses,  a  Levite,  and  leadership,  in  the 
hands  of  Joshua,  an  Ephraiinite,  and  snbseiiuently  in  the 
hands  of  Samson,  a  Danite,  but  from  the  Davidic  e.a  roy 
alty  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Jndali.  Yet  not  always  in  a 
kingly  foi'in.  In  the  house  of  David,  the  sceptre  remained 
until  the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  other  tribes  in  their 
history  after  the  secession  being  nnder  many  dynasties. 
The  rulers  of  the  restored  peojile,  now  called  Jews,  were 
at  first  of  the  house  of  David.  Ezra  iii.  2.  Subsequently 
the  chief  power  lay  in  the  hands  of  priest-princes,  of  the 
house  of  Levi,  yet  the  nation  governed  was  essentially  of 
the  house  of  Judah.  So  that  in  reality  the  sceptre  did 
not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  roj-alty  from  his  successors, 
until  the  usurpation  of  the  iJumean  Herod,  in  whose 
reign  the  son  of  David,  the  son  of  Judah,  came.  We  may 
deem  the  passage,  if  Messianic,  tribally  and  thereby  tpyi- 
cally  Messianic. 


THE   PROPHECY   OF   BALAAM. 

NUMBERS  XXIV.  14-17. 


LITKKATURK. 

Balaam.  Monoarraph  by  Honjjstcnbenr.  Kalisch's  Commentary 
on  NnnibtTs.     Bil).  Sac.  vol.  3,  art.  by  1{.  1).  C.  Uobbins. 

Bil).  Sac.  vol.  3,  True  Date  of  Advent  of  Christ,  art.  bv  Wicsoler, 
trans.  l)y  Cx.  K.  Day.     'I'lie  Star  of  the  Wise  Man.  by  U.  C.  Treneii. 

Stanley's  Jewisii  Clinrch,  vol.  I.     Ewalil's  Hist,  of  Israel,  vol  2. 

Kurtz'  History  of  the  Old  (^ovciiant,  vol.  2.  Messianic  Prophe- 
cies, Franz  Dclitzsch,  chap,  viii.,  §  IJ. 


50 


re:makks. 


Remark  1.  Our  limits  in  this  S3-Ilabus,  and  the  diffi- 
culty in  printing  Hebrew  words,  will  prevent  any  careful 
exegesis  of  this  much-dis]3uted  prophecy. 

Remark  2.  A  priori,  it  is  no  objection  to  the  actual- 
ity of  such  a  prophecy  that  the  speaker  was  a  bad  man. 
God  can  use  such  agencies  as  he  pleases,  and  there  may 
be  even  to  our  eyes  wisdom  in  the  selection.  Other  simi- 
lar instances  in  the  Scriptures  are  suggestive. 

Remark  3.  The  circumstances  would  warrant  such 
a  prophecy ;  i.e.,  God's  enemies  needed  to  know  His  pur- 
poses concerning  His  own  people.  Its  position  in  the  his- 
tory of  God's  people  is  an  appropriate  and  natural  one. 
The  controversy  as  to  the  locality  of  the  prophecy  in  the 
history  is  capable  of  adjustment  to  a  believer  in  revelation. 
There  are  difficulties  connected  with  this  matter,  however, 
which  cannot  now  be  considered. 

Remark  4.  By  the  sj'mbol  of  the  Star,  and  that  of 
the  Sceptre,  we  have  the  idea  of  royalty,  and  by  the  use  of 
these  emblems  in  the  passage,  victory  over  foes.  If  the 
passage  is  Messianic,  and  the  date  correct,  it  is  the  first 
passage  which  presents  to  us  Messiah  as  King.  Delitzsch 
says  (0.  T.  Hist,  of  Redemption,  §  29),  ''That  which  is 
promised  to  Judah  as  the  royal  tribe,  is  hereafter  con- 
nected with  the  person  of  a  King,  through  whom  Judah 
ati:ains  the  dominion  of  the  world,  to  which,  according  to 
Gen.  xlix.  10,  he  was  designated  after  the  arrival  in  Shi- 
loh."  "  He  is  the  King  of  the  final  period,  through  whom 
Israel  conquers  all  the  neighboring  nations ;  and  though 
Israel  for  a  time  is  threatened  by  Ashur,  the  world- 
empire  of  the  East,  and  subjugated  by  Chittira,  the  world- 
empire  of  the  West,  (I  Mace.  i.  1 :  viii.  5),  it  victoriously 
outlasts  the  nearest  and  most  remote  movements  of  the 
nations."  At  any  rate,  some  King  is  to  arise  who  is  to 
subdue  God's  enemies :  and  from  the  typical  usage  of  Edom 
and  Moab,  as  the  symbols  of  unchecked  hatred  to  Israel 
by  the  later  prophets,  it  is  quite  evident  that  this  pro- 
phecy in  the  main  is  Messianic,  bringing  forward  His 
kingly  office.     Rev.  xxii.  16. 

Note.     The  Targum  of  Onkelos  refers  to  it  as  Messi- 


anic.  In  the  Christian  Era,  the  appearance  of  Bar-cochab 
was  welcomed  by  the  Jews  as  the  fulfihnent  of  this  proph- 
ecy.    The  Christian  Fathers  interpreted  it  as  Messianic. 


•THE   PROPHET   LIKE   MOSES. 

DEUT.  xviii.  15-19. 

Most  conservative  critics  agree  that  this  passage  is 
Messianic,  but  they  differ  as  to  its  exclusive  reference  to 
the  Messiah.  Some  maintain  tliat  the  word  "prophet"  is 
used  collectively^  for  the  whole  body  of  the  prophets ; 
others  that  it  is  used  ideally  as  a  typical  picture  of  the 
true  Messiah;  and  others  claim  that  it  refers  to  Messiah 
alone,  a  par  excellence. 

REiSLA-RKS. 

Remark  1.  The  best  way  to  ascertain  the  meaning 
of  the  passage  is  to  look  at  it  analytically,  (a)  By  the 
context,  a  sharp  contrast  is  drawn  between  false  prophets 
and  genuine  prophets;  and  Israel  is  to  have  a  genuine 
one.  Vss.  12-14.  (6)  The  prophet  to  come  was  to  be 
like  Moses.  Vss.  15-18.  (c)  He  was  to  be  a  mediating 
lawgiver  between  a  dread  divinity  and  a  trembling  peo- 
ple. Vss.  16-17.  Ex.  XX.  18-19.  (c?)  His  word  was 
to  be  imperative  and  ultimate.  Vs.  18.  (e)  His  word  was 
to  be  so  emphatically  the  expression  of  the  divine  mind 
that  Jehovah  would  take  into  his  own  hands  the  punish- 
ment merited  by  a  disobedience  of  it.     Vs.  19. 

Remark  2.  Still  more  light  may  be  shed  upon  the 
passage  by  comparing  it  with  a  kindred  passage  in  Num. 
xii.  6,  and  with  other  passages  in  the  Pentateuch,  (a) 
Moses  is  styled  God's  prophet  pre-eminently.  Comparing 
him  with  other  prophets,  this  distinction  is  made  by  assign- 
ing to  him  an  especial  immediateness  in  the  reception  of 
his  messages,  and  by  the  distinctness  or  matter-of-factness 
which  is  to  characterize  them.  In  Num.  xii.  6-8,  where 
Jehovah  rebukes  the  jealousy  of  Aaron  and  Miriam,  ou  ac- 


22 

count  of  the  official  rank  of  their  brother,  Jehovah  says : 
Hear  now  my  words :  If  ye  have,  or  if  there  be,  a  prophet 
among  you,  I,  Jehovah,  will  make  myself  known  to  him  ; 
in  a  vision,  in  a  dream,  I  will  speak  to  him.  Not  so  is 
my  servant  Moses.  He  is  faithful  in  all  my  house. 
Mouth  to  mouth  will  I  speak  to  him,  and  by  an  appear- 
ance, i.e.,  with  open  face,  and  not  in  riddles  or  dark 
speeches ;  and  the  form  of  Jehovah  he  beholds  clearly. 
The  distinction  here  drawn  between  Moses  and  other 
prophets  lies  in  the  mode  of  communication  and  the 
official  position  of  Moses  himself.  His  message  was  to  be 
the  result  of  a  peculiar,  highly-favored  intercommunion, 
an  open  face-to-face  revelation.  It  was  also  to  be  distinct 
from  all  mere  symbolism  and  prophetic  action,  so  charac- 
teristic of  other  prophets.  They  received  their  knowl- 
edge in  an  ecstatic  state,  by  visions  and  dreams.  He  was 
also  the  mediator  of  the  covenant  for  the  whole  house  of 
Israel,  with  reference  to  whose  laws  nothing  was  to  be 
added  or  subtracted.  Others  were  simply  the  expositors 
to  parts  of  Israel  of  what  Moses  had  already  set  forth. 
Heb.  iii.  5.  (i)  Moses'  pi-e-eminence  is  likewise  affirmed 
in  Deut.  xxxiv.  10.  The  statement  is  made  by  one  who 
added  the  appendix  to  Deuteronomy.  The  author  and 
date  are  unknown,  but  the  statement  may  be  accepted  as 
authoritative. 

Remark  3.  In  the  New  Testament  the  passage  is 
referred  to  as  having  its  fulfilment  in  Christ.  Thus  (a) 
Peter  refers  the  language  to  Christ  as  affirmed  by  Moses, 
expounding  thereby  the  mediatorial  office  of  Christ.  He 
allows,  however,  to  others,  as  prophets,  the  province  of 
foretelling  the  coming  of  the  ^lessiah.  Acts  iii.  22-24. 
(6)  Stephen  does  the  same,  i.e.,  he  has  the  same  purpose 
evidently  in  his  mind,  and  would  have  brought  it  out,  had 
he  been  permitted  to  finish  his  defense.  Acts  vii.  37. 
(c)  During  the  ministry  of  our  Lord,  the  passage  seems 
to  have  been  currently  accepted  as  Messianic.  In  John 
i.  21,  where  John  the  Baptist  denies  that  he  was  the 
prophet  expected,  assuring  his  questioners  that  he  was 
merely  the  forerunner  of  such  an  one,  according  to  Isa. 
xl.  3,  and  Mai.  iii.  1,  the  reference  is  apparent.  In  John 
V.  45   the  direct  charge  of  Christ  was  that  the  people 


23 

would  not  listen  to  Him  when  He  announced  His  Father's 
word,  and  their  guilt  in  the  matter  was  emphasized  by  the 
fact  that  Moses  would  accuse  them  of  their  crime  inas- 
much as  he  had  written  of  Him.  In  both  these  cases  the 
passage  under  consideration  must  be  the  one  in  the  minds 
of  the  speakers,  as  it  is  the  only  place  in  the  Pentateuch 
where  the  idea  of  Messiah  as  a  prophet  is  referred  to.  See 
also  John  vi.  14  and  vii.  40,  and  iv.  25. 

Remark  4.  How  the  language  of  this  passage  would 
have  been  understood  by  the  contemporaries  of  Moses,  it 
is  impossible  to  say.  They  would  have  looked  merely  for 
another  Moses.  As  a  fact,  the  Jews  never  saw  one  like 
him  in  his  highest  office  until  the  Messiah  came.  While 
other  prophets  hold  a  subordinate  place,  and  are  justly 
tyi)ical  of  the  Messiah,  the  one  spoken  of  here  was  to 
stand  above  them  in  the  immediateness  of  his  connexion 
with  Jehovah,  and  in  the  infallibility  of  his  utterances  as 
Lawgiver.  No  prophet  subsequent  to  the  time  of  Moses 
attained  to  that  honor.  Christ  as  Son  over  His  own 
house  was  superior  to  Moses  as  a  servant  in  his  own 
house.  Heb.  iii.  5.  He  who  could  say  "  The  words 
that  I  speak  unto  you,  I  speak  not  from  myself;"  (John 
xiv.  10),  "  1  speak  the  things  which  1  have  seen  with  my 
Father;"  (John  viii.  38), ''As  my  Father  taught  me  I 
speak  these  things;"  (John  viii.  28),  "He  that  hath  seen 
Me,  hath  seen  the  Father ;"  (John  xiv.  9),  alone  illustrates 
and  transcends  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses. 


MESSIANIC   PASSAGES   IN   THE   PSALMS. 

i.rn:KATURE. 

J.  Pyc  Smitli's  Testimony  to  Messiah. 

Heiig>tc'iil)or';*s  Clirisloloiiy. 

KrimiiiiiicliL'i's  Siitl'c'iiii'r  Saviour. 

Sciiottucn's  Ilorac  Hubniicae. 

Piiscys  Daniel. 

Lt-atlie's  Testimony  of  O.  T.  to  Messiah. 

Kuinivc-'s  (lie  Messianisclien  I'sninicn. 

B.iiir.s  Zwoir  Mcssianisciien  I'sainicn  erkliirt. 

Coninicntaiios  —  Purowne  —  Deiitzsch  —  Olshauson  —  Hagpnbach 

—  Murpliy  —  Ak'xaiulc-r  -  Jennings   and    Lowe— Ewald  —  Hitzig  — H. 
Gruetz  — Kay  — Four  Friends  —  Lanire  (Moll)  —  Spealier's  — Vuihluger 

—  Thrupp  (lutroUucliou)  — C.  Phillips. 


u 


PRELIMINARY. 


Before  turning  our  attention  to  such  Psalms  as  seem 
to  be  Messianic,  a  tew  bints  as  to  the  preservation  of  the 
Messianic  idea  between  the  period  of  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  early  Psalms,  deserve  a  brief  notice.  As  a  history 
of  the  chosen  nation,  Joshua,  Judges,  and  I  and  11 
Samuel  might  be  expected  to  give  some  fore-gleams  of 
the  clearer  light  in  the  Psalms.  They  evidently  contain 
history,  and  are  designed  for  the  history  of  this  interven- 
ing period,  whoever  were  the  authors,  and  whatever  the 
date  of  their  production.  They  cover  a  long,  dark  period, 
a  period  when  the  longings  of  a  pious  heart  would  seek  an 
expression  of  its  hopes,  if  such  hopes  were  cherished. 
And,  accordnigly,  we  find  something,  very  scanty  indeed, 
which  looks,  at  least,  like  the  reflexion  of  a  rainbow  thrown 
out  from  this  period  of  storms. 

In  the  farewell  of  Joshua  (Josh,  xxiii.;  xxiv.)  we  have 
nothing  strictly  Messianic,  except  as  it  breathes  the  spirit 
of  Moses,  and  looks  into  the  future  of  the  nation,  as  per- 
haps a  typical  nation,  at  any  rate  as  a  nation  elected  to  a 
pure  and  sacred  destiny,  provided  that  it  is  faithful  to  its 
calling.  The  brief,  prophetic  address  in  Judges  vi.  8-10, 
is  merely  a  warning  concerning  Israel's  backslidings.  The 
triumphal  song  of  the  prophetess  Deborah  (Judges  v.),  so 
antique  in  forjn  as  to  bear  witness  to  its  assigned  age, 
contains  little  of  the  Messianic  idea,  beyond  the  paean 
note  of  faith's  tinal  victory.  But  when  we  come  to  the 
song  of  Hannah  (1  Sam.  ii.  1-10),  in  the  days  of  Eli,  the 
echo  of  which  is  Mary's  Magnihcat  (Luke  i.  46-54),  her 
closing  words  seem  to  anticipate  an  Anointed  One, 
through  whom  Jehovah  is  to  work  wonders.  Like  proph- 
ecy, generally,  she  ascends  from  her  personal  victory  over 
her  enemy,  Peninnah,  to  a  general  victory  over  all  of 
Jehovah's  foes,  by  means  of  this  Anointed  One.  "  Jeho- 
vah will  judge  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  will  grant  power 
to  the  King,  and  will  exalt  the  horn  of  His  Anointed." 
As  is  well  known,  there  was  no  king  in  Israel  at  this 
time,  nor  for  many  years  subsequently.  Even  when  tlie 
time  came,  her  son,  Samuel,  strongly  objected  to  the  elec- 
tion of  a  king.     Was  this  utterance  of  hers  merely  a 


woman's  weak,  nervous  longing  for  some  king  to  appear, 
who  should  change  the  chaotic  condition  of  the  nation 
into  order  and  subdue  their  enemies,  t)r  was  it  an  inspired 
bursting  forth  of  a  gleam  of  hope  through  the  dense  dark- 


ness 


? 


Passing  to  I  Sam.  ii.  27-36,  we  tind  an  unnamed 
prophet,  proclaiming  the  rise  of-a  line  of  priests,  distinct 
from  those  of  the  house  of  Eli,  which  is  to  be  j^erpetual. 
•'And  I  will  raise  me  up  a  faithful  priest,  who  shall  do 
according  to  that  which  is  in  my  heart  and  in  my  mind, 
and  I  will  build  him  a  faithful  (permanent)  house,  and  he 
shall  walk  before  mine  Anointed  forever."  Eli  belonged 
to  the  house  of  Ithamar,  of  the  house  of  Levi,  of  the  house 
of  Aaron.  The  woe  pronounced  upon  his  sons,  when 
removing  them  from  the  priesthood,  was  not  immediately 
carried  out ;  for  we  find  Ahijah,  the  son  of  Phinehas,  the 
grandson  of  Eli,  in  the  priest's  office  (I  Sam.  xiv.  3),  and 
a  brother  of  Ahijah,  Ahimelech,  as  high  priest  at  Nob. 
(I  Sam.  xxi.  2 ;  xxii.  9.)  Ahimelech's  son,  Abiathar,  was 
with  David  as  high  priest  during  David's  persecution  by 
Saul,  and  was  the  last  of  the  sons  of  Ithamar  to  be  hon- 
ored with  the  high  priesthood.  He  joined  in  conspirac}'- 
against  Solomon,  and  was  deposed  by  Solomon  from  his 
office,  verifying  in  his  sad  fate  the  woe  pronounced  upon 
the  house  of  Eli.  (I  Kings  ii.  27.)  Henceforward,  the 
line  of  Eleazar,  or  the  Zadokian  line,  as  it  is  called, 
retains  possession  of  the  priesthood ;  and  as  Delitzsch 
says  (M.  P.  ch.  viii.  §  17),  "•  The  promise  in  I  Sam.  ii.  35,  is 
primarily  realized  in  all  the  better  Zadokian  high  priests 
who  stood  at  the  side  of  the  better  kings  from  the  house  of 
David.  But  its  ultimate  fulfilment  is  found  in  the  Christ 
of  God,  in  whom,  according  to  Zech.  vi.  13,  the  ideal 
king  and  priest  do  not  stand  side  by  side,  but  are 
united." 

Passing  to  II  Sam.  vii.  and  I  Chron.  xvii.,  the  kingly 
position  of  Messiah  stands  out  still  more  clearly.  In  his 
desire  to  build  a  house  for  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  David 
is  checked  by  a  revelation  from  Nathan,  the  prophet,  who 
assures  him  that  while  his  pious  wish  in  this  regard  can- 
not be  granted,  it  shall  be  compensated  for  by  a  higher 
honor.     This   honor   is   the    permanency  of  the   Davidic 


26 

dynasty,  the  perpetuation  of  a  line  of  kings  from  his  own 
loins.  His  dynasty  is  not  to  be  elective  as  was  that  of 
Saul,  but  hereditary.  The  highest  personal  honor,  accord- 
ing to  the  ambition  of  ancient  and  modern  royalty,  was 
thus  guaranteed  to  him.  "  When  thy  days  shall  be  ful- 
filled, and  thou  shalt  sleep  with  thy  fathers,  then  will  I 
raise  up  thy  seed  after  thee,  which  shall  proceed  out  of  thy 
bowels,  and  I  will  establish  his  kingdom.  He  shall  build 
me  a  house  to  my  name,  and  I  will  establish  the  throne  of 
his  kingdom/orgver."  (H  Sam.  vii.  12-19.)  The  Anointed 
One  here  is  not  David,  but  a  descendant  of  David.  The 
immediate  verification  would  be  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
The  term  "seed,"  however,  in  vs.  12,  seems  to  be  general 
as  well  as  individual,  when  expounded  by  vs.  13.  "I 
will  establish  the  throne  of  his  kingdom  forever.''^  What 
follows,  in  vss.  14-16,  cannot  well  be  explained  except  as 
indicating  the  perpetuity  of  the  Davidic  dynasty.  And 
the  response  of  David  (vss.  18-19)  implies,  certainly,  that 
he  so  understood  it.  Very  jejune  would  be  an  interpreta- 
tion which  limited  the  adoration  of  the  royal  singer  for 
this  great  act  of  divine  condescension  to  allowing  him 
the  privilege  of  having  one  son  to  sit  upon  his  throne. 

These  hints  of  something  hopeful  for  the  future  wel- 
fare of  Israel,  though  they  are  but  hints,  intimate  at 
least  that  in  the  Messianic  thought  we  have  passed  from 
the  Mosaic  prophecy  concerning  Him  as  a  prophet  to 
other  offices  of  his,  those  of  Priest  and  King.  They  are 
but  rays  of  light  in  the  dark  past,  but  they  give  the  key- 
note by  which  the  singers  of  Israel  in  the  Psalms,  sung 
their  triumphal  songs. 


MESSIANIC   PSALMS. 

The  Messianic  Psalms  may  be  divided  into  two 
classes :  those  which  speak  of  the  Messiah  as  King  and 
Conqueror,  and  those  which  speak  of  Him  as  Sufferer. 
As  Priest,  He  is  referred  to  in  Ps.  ex.,  but  no  entire 
Psalm  presents  Him  in  that  peculiar  attitude.  It  was 
not  necessary,  perhaps,  inasmuch  as  the  ceremonial  law 


was  not  yet  abrogated  :  and  its  evident  design,  in  thought 
at  least,  was  to  keep  the  priestly  intercessory  idea  ever 
active  in  the  minds  of  the  Jewish  nation. 

Of  those  Psalms  which  picture  the  Messiah  as  King 
and  Sufferer,  another  division  may  be  made,  viz.,  Predic- 
tive and  Typically-Predictive.  The  number  of  entire 
Psalms,  however,  which  may  be  reckoned  as  Messianic  is 
very  small.  It  is  to  these  we  confine  our  examination. 
Single  passages,  as  vouched  for  by  quotation  in  the  New 
Testament,  are  quite  numerous,  but  these  must  now  be 
omitted. 

As  King^  Psalms  ii.  and  ex.  are  Predictive.  Psalm 
ii.,  however,  is  founded  upon  an  actual  as  the  basis  of  an 
ideal.  As  King^  Psalms  Ixxii.,  xlv.,  xx.,  xxi.  are  Typical, 
though  containing  predictive  elements.  Of  these  only 
Ixxii.  and  xlv.  can  be  said  to  be  pervaded  by  the  Messi- 
anic elements.  As  Sufferer^  Psalms  xxii.  and  Ixix.  are 
generally  reckoned,  but  only  xxii.  can  bear  an  exclu- 
sively Messianic  interpretation,  and  this  is  Typical.  Psalm 
xvi.,  by  the  use  made  of  it  in  the  New  Testament,  may  be 
deemed  typically-predictive  of  Messiah's  Resurrection. 
We  will  consider  the  more  important  of  these  Psalms 
as  to  their  Messianic  element  in  the  following  order : 
ii.,  ex.,  Ixxii.,  xlv.,  xxii.,  xvi. 


PSALM  II. 

LITERATURE. 

Bib.  Sac.  vol.  7,  art.  by  C.  E.  Stowe. 

That  this  Psalm  is  Messianic,  portraying  the  Messiah 
as  King  and  Conqueror,  is  evident  from  the  following  con- 
siderations : 

1.  Jewish  commentators,  early  and  late,  so  inter- 
preted it,  though  they  modified  their  interpretation  of  it 
as  to  its  verification  in  Christ  as  the  Messiah.  They  can- 
didly say  that  the  reason  for  their  modification  is  polemi- 
cal.    See  Perowne,  Delitzsch,  Schottgen. 

2.  The  New  Testament  writers  ascribe  to  it  a  Mes- 
sianic  character.      In  Acts  iv.  24,  vs.  27,  vss.  1  and  2 


•28 

A,re  said  to  have  been  fulfilled  in  the  conspiracy  of  the 
Jewish  rulers  and  of  Pilate  to  put  Christ  to  death.  In 
Acts  xiii.  33,  Paul  adduces  vs.  7  as  proof  of  the 
sonship  of  the  Messiah,  as  declared,  or  made  manifest,  by 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead.  In  Hebrews  i. 
5,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  God  addressed  the  language 
of  this  verse  to  His  son.  See  also  Hebrews  vs.  5.  These 
passages  are  not  quoted  by  way  of  accommodation  or 
illustration,  but  as  verification,  as  having  their  real  fulfil- 
ment in  Christ,  and  in  Christ  alone. 

3.  The  course  of  thought  in  the  Psalm  demands  the 
Messianic  sense.  The  language  cannot  be  justly  applied 
to  any  other  Prince  or  Ruler  without  excessive  exaggera- 
tion. The  dominion  is  to  be  universal,  including  Gentiles 
and  Jews.  The  representation  in  this  respect  harmonizes 
with  what  the  prophets  teach  concerning  the  Messianic 
reign.  Isa.  ii.'  2  ;  Micah  iv.  1 ;  Zech.  ix.  10.  A  verifica- 
tion in  Uzziah,  Hezekiah,  or  Alexander  Jannaeus,  as  crit- 
ics claim,  is  preposterous. 

4.  The  objections  to  the  Messianic  interpretation  of 
this  Psalm  are  not  valid  when  tlie  facts  in  the  case  are 
candidly  considered,  (a)  It  is  said  that  the  Psalm  refers 
exclusively  to  the  reign  of  David.  But  allowing  the 
Davidic  authorship,  it  is  inapplicable  to  him,  because  it 
treats  of  a  king  recently  appointed,  against  whom  the 
princes  of  the  world  and  the  heathen  nations  rebelled  ; 
whereas  David  when  he  began  to  reign  was  sovereign 
over  only  a  part  of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and  had  made  as 
yet  no  foreign  conquests.  If,  however,  the  Psalm  is 
Davidic,  the  picture  might  have  its  background  in  the  last 
years  of  his  reign,  in  the  Ammonitish  wars  (2  Sam.  x.),  and 
refer  to  a  successor.  (2  Sam.  vii.)  Such  a  view  would  give 
to  the  Psalm  a  typically-predictive  character,  (b)  It  is  said 
that  the  Psalm  refers  exclusively  to  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
but  no  rebellion  of  any  mark  occurred  during  his  reign, 
and  the  events  foreshadowed  in  the  Psalm  find  no  corres- 
pondence in  his  recorded  history,  (c)  It  is  said  that  the 
language  with  reference  to  the  enemies  of  the  Messiah  is 
too  severe  to  be  applicable  to  Christ.  But  it  is  no  more 
severe  than  the  language  of  Christ  himself.  Matt.  xxv. 
46  :  Luke  xix.  27  ;  Rev.  ii.  27  :  xix.  15. 


^9 


ANALYSIS. 

1.  The  enemies  of  Messiah  conspire  against  Him, 
and  refuse  to  submit  to  His  authority.     Vss.  1-8. 

2.  Their  hostility  is  vain,  because  Jehovah  has  made 
Him  the  moral  King  and  Governor  of  the  world,  and 
given  Him  the  power  to  establish  His  claim  to  the  title. 
Vss.  4-9. 

8.  Unqualified  submission  being  their  only  escape 
from  a  terrible  doom.  His  enemies  are  bidden  yield  to  His 
sceptre.     Vss.  10-12. 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  Studying  this  Psalm  as  to  its  Messianic 
character,  special  attention  must  be  given  to  vs.  7.  "  Let 
me  relate  the  particulars  concerning  a  decree  (Ps.  Ixix.  27)  : 
Jehovah  has  said  to  me,  My  Son  art  Thou :  this  day  have 
I  begotten  Thee." 

Remark  2.  The  subsequent  use  of  this  verse,  or  the 
thought  of  the  verse,  implies  a  broader  meaning  than  the 
birth  of  a  merely  human  monarch.  Aside  from  Dan. 
vii.  13,  and  possibly  Dan,  iii.  25,  it  is  the  only  passage  in 
the  Old  Testament  to  which  the  divine  sonship  can  be 
referred  as  being  prophetic.  Yet  in  the  New  Testament 
such  a  sonship  is  recognized  as  an  expected  fact.  See 
Matt.  iii.  17  ;  John  i.  14 ;  John  i.  49 ;  Matt.  xxvi.  Q'^ ; 
Rom.  i.  3 ;  Heb.  i.  5,  and  vs.  5 ;  Acts  xiii.  33. 

Remark  3.  The  verse  in  the  Hebrew  fits  this  broad 
application  very  suggestively.  The  scene  of  the  dialogue 
between  Jehovah  and  His  anointed  is  placed  by  the 
Psalmist-Seer  in  Heaven  (vs.  4).  In  vs.  6  the  emphatic 
pronoun  introduces  the  words  of  Jehovah,  and  empha- 
sizes the  position  of  the  speaker,  as  if  he  had  said :  You 
have  had  your  way,  now  /  will  have  mine.  I  will  fit  my 
king  against  your  kings.  I  have  established  my  king 
upon  Zion:  not  merely  Jerusalem,  but  the  heavenly 
Jerusalem,  of  which  the  earthly  Jerusalem  is  merely  a 
type.  The  position  is  conferred,  not  assumed.  Then 
come  the  words  of  vs.  7.  The  speaker,  the  Anointed 
One,  quotes  the  language  of  Jehovah  as  addressed  to  Him. 
In  this  language  the  two  emphatic  words  are  the  pronoun 


and  the  verb ;  equivalent  to  saying :  I,  on  my  part,  have 
begotten  a  Son  of  my  own  proper  self;  z.e.,  of  m7/  own 
nature.  Others  are  called  my  sons  declaratively,  or  by 
adoption,  but  this  one  is  to  be  just  like  me,  the  Mono- 
genes.  In  no  other  instance  in  the  Old  Testament  is  the 
verb  "  to  beget "  used  to  denote  the  begetting  of  a  son  by 
God.  Messiah's  mother  is  frequently  spoken  of,  and  as 
the  descendant  of  David  He  is  frequently  mentioned,  but 
here,  as  Moll  remarks,  "  in  a  determined  case  some  one  has 
l3een  placed  in  this  relation  by  God  Himself,  and  indeed 
in  the  history  of  revelation^  See  Pusey's  Lectures  on 
Baniel,  p.  479.  The  word  "  today,"  or  "  this  day,"  may 
signify  that  at  this  specific  time  Jehovah  appointed  the 
Anointed  One  to  the  royal  position,  or  that  at  this  time 
he  declared  or  manifested  Him  as  such.  The  tense  of  the 
verb  affirms  a  completed  act,  either  at  a  moment  previ- 
ously, or  at  any  time  previously :  (See  I  Sam.  x.  19,  and 
xxvi.  19),  equivalent  to  saying,  ''  Today  it  is  an  unques- 
tioned and  actual  fact  that  I  have  begotten  Thee."  So  far 
as  the  divine  thought  is  concerned,  it  may  be  eternal.  So 
far  as  the  manifestation  of  the  fact  is  concerned,  it  might 
be  in  the  theophanies  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  in  the 
incarnation  of  the  New  Testament,  crowned  as  the  latter 
was  by  undeniable  proof  in  His  resurrection. 

Remark  4.  The  verse,  therefore,  by  its  connection, 
and  by  its  peculiarity  of  language,  as  well  as  by  the  use 
made  of  it  in  the  New  Testament,  may  be  justly  consid- 
ered prophetically  Messianic. 

PSALM  ex. 

LITERATURE. 

Bib.  Sac.  vol.  9,  Art.  by  B.  B.  Edwards. 

This  Psalm  resembles  the  second,  and  has  for  its 
principal  thought  the  same  theme,  Messiah  as  Conqueror. 
The  evidence  for  its  Messianic  character  is  two-fold ;  the 
testimony  of  the  older  Jewish  commentators  and  the 
testimony  of  Christ  himself.  In  the  early  Jewish  litera- 
ture nearly  every  verse  of  the  Psalm  is  commented  upon 
as  Messianic,  and  the  authorship  as  Davidic ;  but  in  the  con- 


81 

troversies  of  the  Jews  with  the  Christian  church,  the 
Rabbis  referred  the  hero  of  the  Psahii  to  David,  Abra- 
ham, Hezekiah,  and  Zerubbabel.  See  Perowne,  Jennings 
and  Lowe,  Schtittgen,  Hengstenberg.  The  testimony  of 
Clirist  is  very  explicit.  He  uses  the  first  verse  as  a  proof 
that  Messiah  when  He  comes  will  be  a  being  so  superior 
to  David  that  David  himself^  under  divine  inspiration, 
had  once  declared  that  He  was  David's  Sovereign.  This 
testimony  is  given  by  each  of  the  three  synoptists,  as 
though  it  was  so  vital  a  matter  no  one  of  them  could  omit 
the  record  of  it.  In  Matt.  xxii.  41-46,  we  read :  "  The 
Pharisees  being  gathered  together,  Jesus  asked  them,  say- 
ing, What  think  you  concerning  the  Messiah?  Whose 
Son  is  he  ?  They  say  to  Him,  Of  David.  He  saith  to 
them,  How  therefore  does  David  in  Spirit  call  him  lord, 
saying.  The  Lord  (Jehovah)  said  to  my  lord.  Sit  at  my 
right  hand,  until  I  place  thine  enemies  under  thy  feet." 
Mark  xii.  35-37  records  the  scene  as  follows:  "And  Jesus 
teaching  in  the  Temple  said.  How  do  the  scribes  say  that 
the  Messiah  is  the  Son  of  David  ?  David  himself  says,  in 
the  Holy  Spirit,  The  Lord  (Jehovah)  said  to  my  lord.  Sit 
at  my  right  hand,  until  I  place  thy  foes  under  thy  feet. 
David  himself  says  that  he  is  lord,  and  whence  is  he  his 
son?  And  the  whole  multitude  heard  him  gladly."  In 
Luke  XX.  41-44,  the  narrator  says :  "And  he  said  to  them 
(Scribes),  How  do  the}'"  say  that  the  Messiah  is  David's 
son  ?  For  David  himself  says  in  the  Book  of  Psalms,  The 
Lord  said  to  my  lord,  Sit  at  my  right  hand,  until  I  place 
thy  foes  as  the  stool  of  thy  feet.  David  therefore  calls 
him  lord,  and  how  is  he  his  son?"  Besides  the  testimony 
already  referred  to,  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  elsewhere  in 
the  New  Testament  quotations  are  made  from  this  Psalm, 
not  by  way  of  accommodation,  but  as  proof-texts  concern- 
ing the  work  and  offices  of  Christ.  See  Acts  ii.  36-36 ; 
I  Cor.  XV.  25;  Heb.  vs.  6;  vii.  17,  21. 

Remark  1.  From  the  use  which  Christ  makes  of  the 
first  verse  of  this  Psalm,  there  follow  two  natural  infer- 
ences :  first,  that  David  was  the  author  of  the  Psalm,  and 
secondly,  that  under  a  special  divine  inspiration  he 
affirmed  lordship  to  some  one  of  whom  he  himself  could 
be  but  a  type.     It  has  been  denied,  however,  that  David 


3? 

was  the  author  of  the  Psalm :  and  it  has  been  affirmed 
that  the  expressions  "David,"  "David  himself,"  do  not 
indicate  authorship  as  endorsed  by  Christ,  but  that  He 
spoke  popularly,  according  to  the  current  opinion  of  the 
times,  without  any  purpose  to  correct  a  false  view,  if  such 
it  was.  He  did  not  deem  it  worth  His  while  to  go  out  of 
his  way  to  guide  His  hearers  as  to  the  little  matter  of 
authoi'ship,  if  indeed  He  knew  the  facts  in  the  case.  He 
either  saw  fit  to  pass  by  the  question  of  authorship  as  a 
matter  of  no  consequence,  or  His  own  knowledge  was 
limited.  He  j^layed  the  part  of  a  popular  orator  if  He  did 
know  otherwise,  or  if  He  did  not  know,  his  ignorance  was 
one  of  the  limitations  of  His  divine  nature.  So  essentially, 
De  Wette,  Neander,  Bleek,  Schenkel,  Keira,  Ewald, 
Meyer,  (a)  As  to  the  Davidic  authorship  of  the  Psalm, 
so  far  as  the  Hebrew  text  can  guide  us,  we  are  dependent 
upon  the  superscription,  which  a  little  suspiciously  con- 
fines itself  in  this  case  to  a  mere  statement  of  authorship. 
The  location  of  the  Psalm  in  the  fifth  Book  of  the  Psklms 
likewise  suggests  a  difficulty  as  to  the  genuineness  of  the 
title.  Moreover,  a  superscription  in  itself  is  not  an  infalli- 
ble guide.  If,  however,  it  harmonize  with  the  contents  of 
the  Psalm  to  which  it  is  prefixed,  it  may  be  accepted  as 
truthful,  whether  placed  there  by  the  author,  which  is 
supposed  to  be  unusual,  or  by  a  compiler.  In  this  case 
the  Sept.,  the  Vulg.,  and  other  versions  agree  in  assigning 
the  authorship  of  this  Psalm  to  David :  and  so  far  as  the 
contents  can  aid  us,  it  is  as  easy  to  allow  Davidic  author- 
ship, as  to  conjecture  an  author.  It  is  also  a  suggestive 
fact  that,  excepting  Heb.  iv.  7,  and  Acts  iv.  25,  wherever 
in  the  New  Testament  Davidic  authorship  is  affirmed  of 
a  Psalm,  the  affirmation  is  confirmed  by  the  superscrip- 
tions in  the  Hebrew  text.  The  reference  in  Heb.  iv.  7  is 
to  Psalm  xcv.,  for  which  there  is  no  title  in  the  Hebrew 
text.  The  Sept.  refers  that  Psalm  to  David.  The  second 
Psalm  referred  to  in  Acts  iv.  25  has  no  title.  It  is  also 
worthy  of  note  that  in  some  of  these  quotations  David  is 
spoken  of  as  speaking  under  the  special  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  In  tliis  particular  the  apostles  harmonize  them- 
selves with  the  strong  utterance  of  Christ  concerning  vs.  1 
of  this  Psalm.    (6)  As  to  the  objection  resting  either  upon 


33 

Christ's  ignorance  or  his  disposition  to  ally  himself  with 
popular  opinion  for  the  sake  of  overthrowing  a  quibble, 
it  does  not  seem  to  be  well  sustained.  It  was  a  great  day 
in  his  life.  It  was  near  the  close  of  his  ministry.  It  was 
a  time  when  if  ever  he  was  bound  to  speak  honestly  and 
state  the  exact  facts.  He  was  in  no  mood  to  catch  his 
enemies  by  a  quibble.  He  had  just  compelled  them  to 
hold  their  peace  by  setting  at  rest  the  query  as  to  the 
tribute-money.  He  looked  at  it  as  a  fact,  and  treated  it 
as  a  fact.  He  had  just  answered  the  crafty  question  of 
the  Sadducees,  by  appealing  to  Moses  aiid  endorsing 
Moses,  touching  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  He  dealt 
there  with  facts,  and  treated  thein  as  facts.  Now  the 
Pharisees  attempt  to  overthrow  him,  and  he  appeals  unto 
David  as  to  the  regal  dignity  of  the  Messiah.  He  deals 
again  with  facts  and  employs  acknowledged  facts.  The 
scene  and  the  intent  of  the  scene  are  so  uni(|ue  and  con- 
crete, it  is  hard  to  believe  that  he  was  merely  attempting 
to  catch  his  enemies  in  a  snare.  There  is  so  much 
manliness  in  it,  one  can  find  no  crevice  for  inserting  a  wil- 
ful deception.  The  argument  with  his  foes  turns  upon 
the  assertion  of  David  himself  as  to  the  regal  position  of 
another,  superior  to  the  Great  King  of  Israel,  whose  supe- 
riority King  David  had  recognized  by  a  divine  revelation, 
and  the  word  n'um  in  vs.  1,  is  very  suggestive  as  to 
Christ's  accuracy  in  this  respect.  Its  position  at  the 
beginning  of  the  verse,  and  its  meaning  as  a  proplietic 
word,  are  in  har)nony  with  the  assertion  of  Christ,  (c) 
The  strongest  objection  to  the  Davidic  authorsliip  lies  in 
the  uniqueness  of  the  Psalm  historically  considered. 
Other  Messianic  Psalms  furnish  us  with  a"  background, 
I.e.,  some  historical  event  which  gave  rise  to  the  Psalm. 
This  one  laughs  us  to  scorn.  Deny  the  authorship  to 
David  and  apply  the  Psalm  to  him,  as  do  manv  critics. 
How  of  him  could  it  be  said,  "  Thou  art  a  priest  forever 
after  the  order  of  Melchizedek  "  ?  David  once  wore  the 
linen  ephod,  but  he  never  was  priest.  He  raised  the 
priesthood  to  special  eminence,  but  never  assumed  the 
office.  And  besides,  the  very  argument  which  the  writer 
to  the  Hebrews  (Heb.  vii.)  uses  to  establish  the  superi- 
ority of  Christ  to   the  Levitical  priesthood    is   founded 


34 

upon  the  abrogation  of  that  priesthood,  and  the  afiirma 
tion  that  the  priesthood  of  Melchizedek  was  the  only  real 
type.  David  never  was  and  never  could  be  a  priest  after 
this  order  except  by  some  hypostatic  transmutation  from 
the  loins  of  Melchizedek  into  the  loins  of  Abraham 
through  the  house  of  Levi,  into  the  house  of  David.  Let 
David  be  the  author  and  apply  the  Psalm  to  Solomon. 
Was  he  either  a  man  of  war  or  a  priest?  Apply  the 
Psalm  to  Abraham,  or  Hezekiah,  or  Zerubbabel,  as  do  the 
Jews  with  the  authorship  Davidic,  and  the  prophecy 
becomes  ridiculous.  The  person  referred  to  in  the  Psalm 
is  to  be  both  prince  or  joint-sovereign  with  Jehovah,  and 
a  priest  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek.  Li  the  Asmonean 
Dynasty  we  have  priesthood  donning  roj^alty,  but  not  roy- 
alty donning  the  priesthood,  nor  could  it  claim  descent 
from  Melchizedek,  If  the  critics  cannot  verify  the  person 
thus  limned  by  the  Psalmist,  as  being  in  himself  both 
King  and  Priest,  may  it  nut  be  that  our  Lord  was  truth- 
ful and  minutely  accurate  when  he  confounded  the  scribes 
by  asserting  that  the  Messiah  was  both  David's  seed  and 
David's  lord  ?  The  parallel  passage  for  the  union  of  roy- 
alty and  priesthood  in  the  Messiah  is  Zech.  vi.  9-15. 
Critics,  of  course,  would  therefore  post-date  the  Psalm  to 
the  time  of  Zechariali,  but  that  is  a  horn  of  the  dilemma 
one  can  push  either  way. 

Remark  2.  Concerning  the  Melchizedek  of  vs.  4, 
nothing  is  known  beyond  what  is  recorded  in  Gen.  xiv. 
18-20,  and  Heb.  vii.  But  from  these  passages  it  appears 
(a)  that  he  was  a  Canaanitish  priest  of  the  Most  High 
God,  {h)  that  Abram  acknowledged  in  him  a  superiority 
to  himself  by  welcoming  his  blessing,  ('•'•The  less  is 
blessed  of  the  better,"  Heb.  vii.  7),  and  by  giving  him  the 
tithes  or  a  portion  of  the  spoils  of  victory,  such  as  were 
due  to  a  priest,  Gen.  xiv.  21;  Heb.  vii.  6  and  9,  (c) 
that  typically,  b}'  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews,  he  was 
deemed  a  type  of  Christ  in  four  particulars,  viz.,  each  was 
a  priest,  but  not  of  the  house  of  Aaron :  each  was  a  priest 
whose  parentage  could  not  be  traced  to  any  human  source- 
no  human  genealogy  in  the  one  case,  no  divine  genealogy 
in  the  other  (Heb.  vii.  3):  each  was  a  perpetual  priest  — 
in  the  one  case  and  in  the  other,  neither  was  to  have  a 


35 

successor  (Heb.  vii.  3)  :  the  priesthood  of  each  was  implied- 
ly unique,  as  reaching  the  needs  of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles. 
Melchizedek  was  not  a  Jew,  though  probably  of  the  Semitic 
race.  As  Delitzsch  says,  rather  poetically,  ''  Melchizedek 
is  the  setting  sun  of  the  primitive  revelation,  which  sheds 
its  last  rays  upon  the  patriarchs,  from  whom  the  true 
light  of  the  world  is  to  arise.  The  sun  sets,  that  when 
the  preparatory  time  of  tlie  i)atriarclis,  the  preparatory 
time  of  Israel,  has  passed  away,  it  may  rise  again  in 
Jesus  Christ,  the  antitype."     See  Com. 

Note.  "After  the  manner  of,"  signifies  "likeness  in 
official  divinity." —  Gesenius. 

Remark  3.  The  phrase,  "  The  Lord  at  thy  right 
hand,"  in  vs.  5,  is  somewhat  perplexing.  The  word 
"  Lord,"  in  the"  text,  is  written  defectively.  It  is  found  so 
written  in  the  Old  Testament  according  to  the  Masorites 
134  times.  When  written  fully  it  may  be  used  for  God, 
or  for  angels  as  representatives  of  God.  When  written 
defectively.,  it  is  limited  in  use  to  the  Deity,  par  excelle^ice. 
In  this  verse,  the  plirase  may  signify,  that  the  Joint- 
Sovereign  as  the  Lord  who  had  been  placed  at  the  right 
hand  of  Jehovah,  was  about  to  do  what  is  subsequently 
asserted,  or  it  may  mean  that  Jehovah  is  to  do  that  great 
work,  the  Joint-Sovereign  being  a  -mere  witness  of  the 
events.  That  is,  tlie  Prince  may  be  honored  with  the 
title  of  Lord,  or  the  term  Lord  may  be  a  mere  s3nionym 
for  Jehovah.  Some  rid  themselves  of  this  choice  by 
affirming  tliat  Jeliovah  is  first  addressed,  and  then  the 
Prince,  in  vss.  6,  7 ;  for  they  admit  that  vss.  6,  7  must 
express  the  movements  of  the  Prince.  Such  transitions 
are  no  strangers  either  in  tlie  Psalms  or  in  the  Prophets  ; 
yet  the  rush  of  thought  to  the  abrupt  close  of  the  Psalm 
is  against  such  breaks  if  they  can  be  avoided.  The  strong- 
est objection  to  the  view  that  it  is  tlie  Prince  who  is  thus 
dignified  by  the  Divine  Name,  is  that  the  term  is  nowhere 
else  applied  to  the  Messiah.  But  since  in  vs.  1  the 
Prince  is  called  "my  lord,"  in  the  singular  number, 
expressing  superiority  to  the  Psalmist,  and  he  is  honored 
with  a  joint-sovereignty  in  the  conquest  portrayed,  may 
it  not  be  that  the  Psalmist,  in  the  flush  of  his  inspi- 
ration, has  applied  the  real  Divine  Name  to  him  here  ? 


36 

We  put  it  as  a  tentative.  In  Psalm  xlv.  7,  the  most 
natural  interpretation,  seemingly  endorsed  in  Heb.  i.  8, 
uses  Elohim  as  an  epithet  for  the  Messiah.  See  also  the 
same  honor,  probably,  in  Isaiah  ix.  6.  Revelation  may 
have  shown  the  Psalmist  that  the  Prince  of  the  House  of 
David  was  infinitely  greater  than  David  the  King.  See 
John  V.  17  ;  x.  30-38. 

Remark  4.  The  Psalm  may  be  properly  called,  as 
Perowne  says,  "a  prediction,  and  a  prediction  of  the 
Christ,  as  the  true  King,  as  the  everlasting  Priest  after 
the  order  of  Melchizedek." 

ANALYSIS. 

1.  The  Messiah  is  represented  as  sitting  at  the  right 
hand  of  Jehovah,  and  invested  with  authority  to  subdue 
all  nations  to  himself.     Vss.  1,  2. 

2.  He  is  represented  as  collecting  his  hosts  for  the 
combat,  who  gather  to  him  willingly,  numerous  and  fresh 
as  the  drops  of  the  morning  dew.     Vs.  3. 

3.  He  is  invested  by  Jehovah  with  the  priestly  office, 
as  well  as  the  kingly,  an  office  of  priesthood  superior  to 
the  Aaronic,  and  is  to  exercise  it  forever.     Vs.  4. 

4.  As  associated  with  Jehovah,  he  marches  from  vic- 
tory to  victory,  unwearied,  until  his  foes  acknowledge  his 
authority.     Vss.  5-7. 

Note.  In  favor  of  the  Davidic  authorship  of  the 
Psalm  are  Perowne,  Delitzsch,  Hengstenberg,  Alexander, 
Jennings  and  Lowe,  "The  Four  Friends,"  Murphy,  Kay, 
Moll,  Vaihinger,  Rosenmiiller,  Kurtz,  Hiivernick,  Tholuck, 
and  others. 

Against  the  Davidic  authorship  and  referring  the  hero 
of  the  Psalm  to  David  or  others,  are  Thrupp,  (to  Zerub- 
babel),  Ewald,  (to  David),  De  Wette,  (to  Uzziah), 
Olshausen,  (to  Jonathan  Maccabeus),  Hitzig,  (same), 
Aben  Ezra,  (to  David  by  an  unknown  Psalmist),  Men- 
delssohn, (same),  and  others. 


8V 

PSALM   LXXII. 

This  Psalm  describes  the  future  power  and  glory  of 
Messiah  under  the  type  of  a  prosperous  King  whose 
dominion  is  to  be  marked  by  a  government  pre-eminent 
for  its  benevolence.  It  resembles  in  general  purport 
Psalm  ii.,  but  as  it  is  not  quoted  in  the  New  Testament, 
and  rests  upon  an  actual  ground-work,  it  illustrates  an 
important  exegetical  principle  which  deserves  special 
notice. 

Some  of  even  the  more  conservative  interpreters  main- 
tain that  only  those  Psalms  are  Messianic  which  are 
endorsed  as  such  in  the  New  Testament.  But  it  is  cer- 
tainly unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  comparatively 
few  Psalms  cited  in  the  New  Testament  exhaust  the  Mes- 
sianic idea  of  the  Psalter.  In  the  New  Testament,  Christ 
is  represented  as  the  prime  subject  of  the  ancient  econ- 
omy :  and  if  only  those  types  and  predictions  have  refer- 
ence to  Him  which  are  specifically  applied  to  Him  in  the 
New  Testament,  it  would  be  difficult  to  see  how  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  could  bear  the  character  they  do,  of  a 
predominant  reference  to  the  Christian  era.  We  put  up 
all  necessary  guards,  if  we  claim  that  the  Psalm  in  ques- 
tion is  clearly  such  as  to  indicate  in  its  highest  sense  an 
applicability  to  Christ  and  His  Kingdom,  and  that  the 
ideas  concerning  Him  and  His  work  extracted  from  it 
are  in  harmony  with  the  general  scope  of  such  teachings 
in  the  Old  Testament  as  are  unquestionably  Messianic. 

This  Psalm,  according  to  the  superscription  com- 
posed by  Solomon,  sketches  his  peaceful  reign  very  much 
as  Psalm  ii.  sketches  the  turbulent  reign  of  some  other 
monarch.  Tradition  is  quite  unanimous  in  giving  it  a 
Messianic  character,  and  its  contents  indicate  very 
strongly  that  no  human  monarch  ever  has  realized  or  ever 
can  realize  its  prophetic  hopes.  The  Psalm  consists  of 
two  parts :  the  theme  of  the  first  part  being  renewed  and 
more  fully  unfolded  in  the  second  part.  The  topics  are, 
1.  The  righteous  character  of  the  King.  Vss.  1-4.  2.  The 
blessings  and  glory  of  His  Kingdom  as  productive  of  hap- 
piness, as  perpetual,  and  as  universal.  Vss.  5-11.  3.  His 
righteous  government  as  displayed  in  his  compassion  for 


38 

His  people.  Vss.  12-14.     4.  A  renewed  celebration  of  his 
glorious  and  beneficent  reign.  Vss.  15-17. 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  No  fair  interpretation  of  this  Psalm  can 
omit  the  absolute  antagonism  between  the  pure  ideal  of  a 
divine  government  and  the  governments  of  the  nations 
which  bordered  upon  Judea. 

Remark  2.  The  style  of  the  Psalm  corresponds  very 
closely  to  that  of  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  and  thus  hints 
at  the  same  authorship. 

Remark  3.  At  what  time  he  composed  it,  if  he  was 
the  author,  is  unknown.  The  reference  to  Sheba,  in  vs. 
10,  implies  that  he  had  been  some  time  upon  his  throne. 
His  ardent  wishes  for  so  grand  a  reign  were  doubtless 
inspired  by  what  he  knew  of  the  prophetic  hopes  of  his 
father.  However  Messianic  the  Psalm  may  be  in  its 
highest  sense,  it  must  be  interpreted  primarily  of  himself. 

Remark  4.  The  word  in  vs.  1,  translated  '  King,' 
has  no  article,  and  is  used  generically  and  poetically. 
Therefore,  properly  translated,  "the  king."  Prov.  xxxi.  1. 
By  "  the  king's  son  "  is  meant  a  king  of  royal  ancestiy. 
So  on  oriental  coins,  and  such  was  an  oriental  custom. 

Remark  5.  The  universality  of  his  reign  is  very 
marked.  Vss.  8-11.  See  Exodus  xxiii.  31 ;  Micah  vii.  12  ; 
Amos  viii.  12 ;  Zech.  ix.  10.  The  Semitic,  Japhetic,  and 
Hamitic  races  are  to  be  included  in  his  sway.  It  is  to  be 
a  reign  as  universal  as  the  limits  of  humanity,  and  in  this 
fact  appears  the  strongest  proof  of  its  real  Messianic 
import.  Vs.  17  has  its  parallel  in  the  promise  to  Abra- 
ham and  his  seed.     Gen.  xii.  2-3. 


PSALM   XLV. 

This  Psalm  portrays  the  marriage  of  a  king  with  a 
princess,  apparently  of  foreign  birth.  Many  suppose  that 
it  celebrates  the  espousals  of  Solomon  with  the  daughter 
of  Pharaoh.     Others,  as  Delitzsch,  think  it  refers  to  the 


3[) 

marriage  of  Joram,  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  with  Atha- 
liah,  of  Tyriaii  origin.  Hitzig  refers  it  to  Ahab's  mar- 
riage with  Jezebel.  Hupfeld  thinks  it  refers  to  the  mar- 
riage of  Solomon  with  some  one  of  the  daughters  of 
Hiram  of  Tyre.  The  reasons  for  supposing  that  the  wife 
of  the  King  Avas  a  foreigner  are  the  Aramaic  word  applied 
to  her  (vs.  10),  and  the  exhortation  for  her  to  forget  her 
own  people  and  her  father's  home,  i.e.,  to  break  away 
from  her  inherited  relationship,  both  in  form  and  in  heart. 
And  the  strongest  reason  for  denying  that  Solomon  is  the 
king  portrayed  is  the  martial  character  of  the  reign  which 
the  Psalmist  pictures  combined  with  the  absence  of  any 
reference  to  Egypt.  The  author  of  the  Psalm  is  unknown. 
Whether  the  plu'ase  in  the  superscription,  "  To  the  sons 
of  Korah,"  expresses  authorship,  or  is  merely  a  dedication 
to  them  to  arrange  the  music  -for  the  Psalm  cannot  be 
decided. 

That  the  Psalm,  primarily  an  epithalamium,  carries 
with  it  typically  a  Messianic  ideal  has  been  the  almost 
unanimous  opinion  of  tradition.  Jew  and  Christian  are 
agreed.  The  King  is  an  ideal  theocratic  King  of  the 
house  of  David  (vs.  6),  under  the  guidance  of  the  King 
OF  Kings,  and  the  Psalmist  whether  or  not  he  understood 
the  full  meaning  of  his  language,  exalts  him  to  so  high  a 
position  that  the  author  of  the  Hebrews  overleaps  the 
primary  application  of  the  thought  of  the  Psalm  and 
applies  them  to  the  Son  of  Man  and  the  Son  of  God. 
The  relation  of  God  as  the  husband  of  his  people  is  an 
Old  Testament  concejjtion  as  well  as  the  representation 
of  the  New  Testament.  Hosea  ii. ;  Ezek.  xvi. ;  Matt, 
xxii.  1 ;  II  Cor.  xi.  2 ;  Rev.  xix.  7 ;  xxi.  2.  Judging  by 
the  use  made  of  vs.  7,  in  Heb.  i.  8-9,  the  ground-work  of 
the  Psalm  is  human,  but  its  scope  is  divine.  If  Messi- 
anic, the  Psalm  is  a  picture  artistically  drawn  of  Messiah 
as  the  royal  Bridegroom. 

ANALYSIS. 

1.  A  description  of  the  King.,  as  beautiful  in  form, 
as  eloquent  in  speech,  as  mighty  in  war,  as  exalted  in 
nature  or  position,  and  as  righteous  in  his  government. 
Vss.  2-9, 


40 

2.  A  description  of  the  bride,  her  royal  appearance, 
her  train  of  virgins,  and  her  joyful  admission  into  the 
King's  palace.     Vss.  10-15. 

3.  A  description  of  the  fruit  of  the  marriage,  as  per- 
petuating the  empire  and  rendering  it  illustrious.  Vss. 
16,  17. 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  That  the  Psalm  is  not  a  mere  epithala- 
mium  is  evident  from  its  being  found  in  the  Psalter  as 
designed  for  the  services  of  the  Temple.  Its  position 
there  can  in  no  other  way  be  accounted  for.  The  very 
full  superscription  hints  also  that  the  compiler  intended  to 
call  attention  to  some  profound  meaning  hidden  in  the 
song. 

Remark  2.  There  is  some  internal  evidence  which 
favors  the  opinion  of  Delitzsch  as  to  the  King  primarily 
referred  to.  (a)  Solomon  had  a  royal  father,  but  not 
vojdil  fathers  (vs.  16);  Joram,  a  sort  of  second  Solomon, 
was  of  the  royal  house  with  many  predecessors.  (J) 
Joram  was  married  to  Athaliah  during  the  lifetime  of  his 
father,  and  it  is  natural  that  such  high  hopes  should  cen- 
tre in  his  nuptials,  (c)  Thus  is  explained  the  Aramaic 
word  for  '  bride,'  or  queen,  "  a  name  that  is,''  sa3'^s  De- 
litzsch, "  elsewhere  Chaldean  (Dan.  v.  2  sq.),  and  Persian 
(Neh.  ii.  6),  and  is  more  North-Palestinian  than  Jewish ; 
for  Athaliah  sprang  from  the  royal  family  of  Tyre,  and 
was  married  by  Joram  out  of  the  royal  family  of  Israel." 
Joram  was  a  warrior  and  Solomon  was  not.  But  (g)  if 
the  poet  intended  to  describe  the  wished-for  reign  of 
Joram,  he  labored  in  vain.  Instead  of  being  realized  in 
that  young  prince,  his  reign  is  one  of  the  darkest,  most 
profligate  and  idolatrous  in  the  sacred  record.  His  was  a 
pitiful  reign  and  a  pitiful  fate.  The  ardent  artistically- 
woven  wish  can  only  find  its  realization  in  the  Christ  of 
God. 

Remark  3.  The  natural  translation  of  verse  7  is, 
"  Thy  throne,  O  God,  forever  and  ever ;  a  sceptre  of 
uprightness  is  the  sceptre  of  Thy  Kingdom."  That  the 
word  Elohim  is  the  vocative,  "0  G-od^''  harmonizes  with 
the  versions,  the  Christian  Fathers,  Jewish  commentators 


41 

and  many  modern  commentators.  The  Sept.,  Chaldee 
Paraphrast,  Aquila,  Synniiachus,  Theodoret,  and  Vulgate 
so  read.  So  do  Kimehi,  Mt)ses,  and  many  Jewish  Rabbis 
even  in  the  12th  century  A.D.  As  to  modern  commen- 
tators, the  conservative  school  favor  the  vocative.  Many 
critics,  however,  read  ''Thy  Throne  of  God,"  i.e.,  thy 
divine  throne,  a  throne  divinely  given  thee,  as  Solomon's 
throne  is  called  the  throne  of  Jehovah.  (I  Chron.  xxix. 
23,  and  I  Chron.  xxviii.  o).  The  noun  with  suffix  is  thus; 
followed  by  the  genitive  of  owjiership.  Tlie  cases  usually 
referred  to  to  establish  this  usage  are  appositionaU  and  do 
not  sustain  the  desired  interpretation  here.  Others  read, 
''  Thy  throne  is  a  throne  of  God,"  repeating  the  word 
"throne,"  which  is  supplying  an  ellipsis  merely  for  a  pur- 
pose. ^  Others  still,  "  Thy  throne  is  God,"  as  we  would 
say  God  is  a  rock.  Extremely  harsh.  A  crude  imper- 
sonation. Whatever  view  be  taken,  it  must  be  admitted 
that  the  mere  application  of  the  term  Elohim  to  an  ideal 
king  is  not  oNtself  &  direct  proof  of  the  divinity  of  that 
person.  To  say  nothing  of  its  being  applied  to  rulers, 
kings  and  judges.  Exodus  xxi.  6;  xxii.  7;  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6, 
and  to  Moses,  Exodus  vii.  1,  and  Exodus  iv.  16,  as  repre- 
sentatives of  God,  the  disembodied  spirit  of  Samuel  is 
called  Elohim,  I  Sam.  xxviii.  13.  Moreover,  in  vs.  8, 
this  Elohim  has  an  Elohim  above  him,  "  Elohim  Thy  Elo- 
him," as  if  to  guard  against  any  misapprehension  as  to  the 
use  of  this  strong  word  to  the  King.  If  he  is  Elohim,  he 
is  Elohim's  Elohim  ;  a  subordination  very  suggestive  of 
tlie  relation  of  the  Father  to  the  Son.  See  Pusey's  Dan- 
iel, pp.  471-4. 

Remark  4.  There  only  remains,  therefore,  a  choice 
between  the  view  of  the  early  Fathers,  which  ascribed 
actual  Godhead  to  the  King,  precise  and  determinative, 
and  the  modification  of  the  term  Elohim  by  its  usage  else- 
where in  a  representative  sense,  reading,  ''^Thy  th?one,  O 
(xod,  is  forever  and  ever : "  i.e..  Thou  art  God's  represent- 
ative King,  or  reading,  "  Thy  divinely-constituted  throne 
is  forever  and  ever  ; '"  i.e..  Thy  divinely-aijpointed  dynasty 
IS  forever  and  ever.  Leviticus  xxvi.  42.  The  thought  of 
the  last  two  is  essentially  the  same. 

Remark  o.     With  the  last  two  views,  the  language  ol" 


42 

Heb.  i.  8,  can  be  substantially  harmonized.  This  King  is 
a  theocratic  representative  of  God,  and  as  such  the  strong- 
term  Elohim  is  applied  to  him.  In  Heb.  i.  8,  the  writer 
does  not  say  that  this  language  was  primarily  addressed 
to  Christ,  but  that  it  was  spoken  of  Christ,  and  was  applic- 
able to  Him.  The  object  of  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews  is 
to  show  the  superiority  of  the  Messiah  to  the  angels,  and 
his  argument  as  drawn  out  by  Ebrard  (m  loco')  is  as  fol- 
lows :  ''•  Three  things  are  declared  of  the  ideal  of  a  theo- 
cratic King  —  consequently  of  the  Messiah;  (a)  he  is 
Elohim;  his  authority  is  the  authority  of  God  himself; 
(6)  his  dominion  is  endless ;  (c )  both  are  true  because 
he  perfectly  fulfils  the  will  of  God.  The  perfect  theo- 
cratical  King  —  therefore  Christ  (which  required  no 
proofs  for  the  readers  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews), 
stands  in  this  threefold  relation  above  the  angels.  He  is 
the  absolute  revelation  of  God,  and  therefore  himself  God  ; 
the  angels  are  only  servants.  He  is  King  of  an  imperish- 
able kingdom;  the  angels  execute  only  periodical  com- 
mands ;  he  rules  in  a  moral  way  as  founder  of  a  kingdom 
of  righteousness,  and  his  whole  dignity  as  Messiah  is 
founded  directly  on  his  moral  and  spiritual  relation  to 
man  ;  the  angels  are  only  mediators  of  outward  appear- 
ances of  nature,  by  which  a  rude,  unsusceptible  people 
are  to  be  traine'd  for  higher  things.'' 

Remark  6.  The  Psalm  with  all  its  difficulties  may 
be  regarded  as  sketching  typically,  Messiah  as  the  Royal 
Bridegroom. 

PSALM   XXII. 
LITERATURE. 

Hengsteutaerg's  Christology,  vol.  4,  Appendix  44. 

Reinke's  Die  Messianischeu  Psalmeu. 

Bohl's  Zwolf  Messianischen  Psalmeu  erkliirt. 

C.  Phillips'  Com.  on  Psalms.     Dr.  McCaul's  Old  Paths. 

Leslie's  Short  and  easy  method  with  the  Jews. 

This  Psalm  is  an  ideal  portraiture  of  Messiah  as  the 
representative  Sufferer.  It  points  by  way  of  appropria- 
tion or  accommodation  to  the  crucifixion.  Even  Strauss 
with  a  sneer  calls  it  "The  Programme  of  the  Messianic 
agony."     See  '•'•The  Old  Faith  and  the  New,""  pp.  89,  90. 


48 

The  quotations  iu  the  New  Testament  are  appropriations 
of  the  language  to  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  except  per- 
haps verse  18,  when  quoted  in  Jolni  xix.  23-24,  and  are 
not  used  as  direct  proofs  that  the  language  of  the  Psalm 
is  Messianic.  It  is  a  full  and  comprehensive  picture  of 
the  exhausting  sufferings  of  a  righteous  man,  inflicted 
upon  him  by  his  enemies  on  account  of  his  piety,  the 
fruits  of  which  in  answer  to  his  prayers  are  paeans  of 
praise  to  God  from  the  whole  earth.  The  picture  is  so 
drawn  that  it  nuw  be  applied  to  an  individual,  to  the 
Jews  in  captivity,  to  the  Cliurch,  or  to  the  Great  Repre- 
sentative Sufferer,  the  Head  of  the  Church.  If  the  Psalm 
is  David's,  according  to  the  superscription,  we  kjiow  of 
no  event  in  his  life  in  which  it  could  have  been  actual- 
ized. It  might  be  his  however  as  a  poetical  limning  of  the 
totality  of  his  sufferings  from  his  enemies.  If  the  Psalm 
is  Jeremiah's,  as  many  suppose,  the  same  difficulties  pre- 
sent themselves.  The  theory  that  the  Psalmist  personi- 
fied his  nation,  as  Rashi,  Kimchi,  Noyes,  and  many  others 
assert,  hardly  meets  the  case.  The  individuality  of  the 
sufferer  is  very  marked.  Vss.  22,  23  strongly  indicate  that 
the  sufferer  is  an  individual  member  of  Jehovah's  congre- 
gation. It  is  Jewish  in  conception,  but  the  last  part  of  it 
is  as  broad  in  its  application  as  the  later  chapters  of 
Isaiah,  and  tlie  later  prophets. 

ANALYSIS. 

The  Psalm  is  divided  into  three  parts.  1.  A  com- 
plaint^ founded  u})on  the  consciousness  of  tlie  absence  of 
God  as  a  help.  Vss.  2-11.  2.  A  prayer^  founded  upon  the 
extremity  of  the  peril.  Vss.  12-22.  3.  A  praise,  founded 
upon  the  wonderful  results  of  a  favorable  answer  to  the 
prayer.     Vss.  23-32. 

REMARKS. 

Remark  1.  The  superscription  is  suggestive.  "  The 
hind  of  the  dawn  "  may  be  the  name  of  a  tune  or  a  song 
to  be  used  in  singing  this  Psalm,  or  it  may  have  an 
enigmatical  signihcation,  •'  the  hind  "  being  the  symbol  of 
innocence,  and  "•  the  tlawn  "  of  a  happier  morning ;  i.e., 
persecuted  innocence  delivered.  Otlier  fanciful  meanings 
have  been  proposed. 


44 

Remark  2.  For  the  difficulties  in  verse  17,  see  Hup- 
feld's  very  full  discussion. 

Rewark  3.  In  a  study  of  this  Psalm,  Psabn  Ixix  ;  cii ; 
the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  and  the  53d  chapter  of 
ksaiah  should  be  carefully  compared. 

PSALM   XVI. 

LITERATURE. 

Biblical  Repository,  vol.  I,  ai't.  by  M.  Stuart. 

Tlie  joyful  tone  of  this  Psalm,  and  the  peculiarly 
hopeful  outlook  upon  his  future  destiny  suggest  the 
thought  that  it  was  composed  either  after  the  escape  of 
the  Psalmist  from  some  imminent  peril  or  in  the  immedi- 
ate prospect  of  death.  That  the  Psalm  is  David's  is 
admitted  by  all  critics  who  allow  to  him  the  authorship  of 
any  Psalm.  The  language  is  rugged  and  archaic,  and  the 
translation  of  the  A.  V.  very  imperfect. 

The  use  made  of  the  last  part  of  it  by  Peter  in  Acts,  ii. 
2i>  sq.,  and  by  Paul  in  Acts  xiii.  33  sq.,  has  led  to  three 
methods  of  interpreting  it. 

One  class  of  interpreters  divide  the  Psabn  into  two 
parts,  applying  the  first  part  to  David  and  the  second  part 
to  the  Messiah.  Another  class  deem  the  Messiah  to  be 
the  speaker  throughout  the  Psalm,  making  the  Psalm  as 
purely  Messianic  as  they  do  Psalm  ex.  Another  class 
consider  David  to  be  the  speaker  throughout  the  Psalm, 
but  as  in  a  true  and  enlarged  sense  typical  of  David's 
Lord.  The  last  view  commends  itself  by  its  simplicity 
and  its  harmony  with  the  interpretation  of  other  similar 
typical  Psalms. 

ANALYSIS. 

Subject.  The  pious  man's  'joy  of  faith'  amid  the 
perils  of  the  present  life,  and  in  the  prospect  of  death. 

1.  This  'joy  of  faith '  has  its  source  in  the  fact  that 
Jehovah  is  the  author  of  his  prosperity.     Vss.  1,  2. 

2.  \n  his  oneness  of  heart  with  Jehovah's  people. 
Vss.  3,  4. 


4h 

3.  In  his  experience  that  hitherto  Jehovah  has  boun- 
tifully cared  for  him.     Vss.  5,  0. 

4.  In  his  confidence  that  Jehovah  will  abundantly 
provide  for  his  future  happiness.     Vss.  7-11. 

REMARK. 

It  is  necessary  in  order  to  understand  the  a])plication 
of  verses  8-11  to  Christ,  as  illustrated  in  His  resurrection, 
first  of  all  to  give  an  exact  translation  of  them  with  a 
running  exegesis. 

Translation. 

Vs.  8.  I  have  placed  Jehovah  before  me  contin- 
ually:  because  He  is  at  my  right  hand  (as  Defender  and 
Protector),  1  cannot  be  overthrown,  i.e.,  either  as  to  my 
choice  of  Him  as  indicated  by  vs.  7,  or  in  mj  present 
emergency.  The  Sept.  from  which  the  Apostles  quote 
agrees  in  the  verse  with  the  Hebrew  text. 

Vs.  9.  Therefore  my  heart  was  glad,  and  my  glory, 
(i.e.,  my  dignity,  my  manhood),  a  poetical  term  for  the 
soul  as  the  noblest  part  of  man  (Gen.  xlix.  6 ;  Ps.  vii.  5 ; 
XXX.  12;  Ivii.  9,  and  cviii.  2),  has  rejoiced:  moreover,  my 
flesh  (or  body)  shall  dwell  (or  tent  itself  awhile)  securely. 
He  believes  he  shall  escape  the  present  danger.  He  will 
not  die,  notwithstanding  the  attack  of  his  enemies,  or 
perhaps  the  extremities  of  disease.  The  Sept.  reads,  "  My 
tongue  has  rejoiced,''  using  the  word  as  the  organ  or 
medium  of  the  joy.  Speecii  is  the  special  glory  of  man. 
For  the  present  and  the  future  his  condition  is  hopeful. 

Vs.  10.  (It  is  so)  Because  Thou  wilt  not  abandon 
my  soul  (i.e.,  as  the  seat  of  life,  or  ilfe,  as  a  personality) 
to  Hades,  and  Thou  wilt  not  give  up  Thy  saint  to  see 
(i.e.,  experience)  the  pit.  He  is  not  now  to  be  exposed 
to  the  terrors  of  the  grave  or  to  enter  the  abode  of 
departed  spirits.  The  Sept.  reads  for  "  to  see  the  pit," 
"  to  see  destruction.''  The  A.  V.  has  "  corruption^"'  which 
is  incorrect.  The  Hebrew  word  is  derived  from  a  verb 
"  to  sink  down,"  and  has  for  its  usual  meaning,  "  pit,"  or 
"  grave."  There  is  no  play  upon  the  word,  as  Alexander 
intimates,  to   fit  the  ditiiculties  in   the  argument  of  the 


4fi 

Apostles.  It  would  be  a  strange  place  for  a  dying  man, 
even  an  inspired  one,  to  play  a  double  entendre  ! 

"  Thy  saint,"  or  "  Thy  pious  one,"  in  the  K'thibh  is 
plural,  but  the  K'ri,  Sept.,  and  the  quotation  in  the  New 
Testameut,  give  it  as  singular.  The  K'ri  is  doubtless  cor- 
rect. According  to  Reinke,  the  singular  is  correct  for  the 
following  reasons :  viz.,  1.  So  in  Sept.,  Syriac,  Chaldee 
Paraphrast,  Jerome,  Paul,  Peter.  2.  Of  269  Mss.,  in  7 
the  Ydth  is  squeezed  in.  3.  The  singular  is  found  in  51 
Mss  which  are  supposed  to  be  the  oldest.  4.  The  older 
Rabbins  endorse  the  singular. 

The  use  of  the  terms  for  David's  personality,  'soul,' 
'body,'  'manhood,'  'pious  one,'  are  very  suggestive  of  his 
absolute  faith  in  Jehovah,  as  a  perfect  Protector  of  his 
whole  man  in  the  time  of  peril. 

Vs.  11.  Shall  I  die?  No!  Thou  wilt  make  me 
know  (by  a  blessed  experience,  something  better),  the 
path  of  life ;  i.e.^  life  from  God,  life  in  God,  life  with  God 
—  the  whole  course  of  the  truest  life.  (Thou  wilt  make 
me  know)  fullness,  or  a  satiation  of  joy,  with  thy  coun- 
tenance, i.e.,  with  the  manifestation  of  thyself  to  me. 
(Thou  wilt  make  me  know)  pleasures  (every  kind)  for- 
ever in  thy  right  hand ;  i.e..,  those  which  are  at  Thy  dis- 
posal, i.e.,  the  gifts  of  an  omnipotent  Giver.  This  last 
clause  is  omitted  by  Peter. 

This  meagre  translation  and  exposition,  every  word 
of  which  in  the  Hebrew,  and  every  clause  of  which  glows 
with  shining  thoughts,  reduced  to  bald  prose,  gives  the 
thought  of  David  as  follows  :  — "  In  view  of  the  mercies  of 
Jehovah  showered  upon  me  in  my  past  life,  I  feel  assured 
that  the  same  protecting  love  will  continue,  and  that  I 
shall  be  saved  from  the  death  which  now  seems  to  be  so 
imminent.  I  shall  not  now  at  this  time  enter  Hades  nor 
experience  the  destruction  of  the  grave." — "  To  see  the 
pit "  and  "  to  see  destruction  "  as  in  Sept.,  and  as  used  by 
Peter  and  Paul,  are  essentially  the  same.  The  Apostles 
had  they  used  the  Hebrew  phrase  would  have  expressed 
the  same  thought.  Ps.  xlix.  10;  Eccles.  ix.  9;  John  iii. 
36.  The  argument  of  the  Apostles  turns  upon  the  force 
of  the  expression  "^o  see,""  i.e..,  to  experience.  David  in 
his  faith  believed  that  at  that  time  he  should  not  die  and 


47 

be  buried,  though  he  afterwards  died  and  was  buried  and 
suffered  the  destruction  of  the  grave.  Christ  did  not  see 
the  destruction  of  the  grave,  did  not  succumb  finally  even 
at  death  to  the  destructive  powers  of  the  grave,  and  will 
no  more  be  subject  to  them.  But  David  did  in  due  time. 
Comparing  Acts  xiii.  34  with  Acts  xiii.  87,  it  is  evident 
that  what  Paul  means  is  the  abiding  in  the  powers  of  the 
grave,  rather  than  the  experiencing  the  powers  of  the 
grave,  and  he  illustrates  the  case  of  Christ,  by  the  con- 
trast with  the  actual  fact  in  the  case  of  David,  reaching 
by  illustration  what  Peter  reaches  by  the  prophetic  asser- 
tion of  David.  What  was  ti'ue  of  David,  tliat  at  this  time 
he  did  not  succumb  to  the  powers  of  the  grave,  was  in  the 
highest  sense  true  of  Christ,  for  Christ  was  absolutely 
delivered  from  such  destruction,  while  David  was  not. 

As  to  the  prophetic  consciousness  of  this  assertion  of 
David,  Avhicli  is  asserted  by  Peter,  see  Peter  himself. 
I  Peter  i.  10-12.  As  is  said  by  Jennings  (Jennings  and 
Lowe),  "  David  bases  his  hope  of  escaping  death  on 
Jehovah's  intervention,  and  since  Jehovah  prostrated  the 
powers  of  death  by  the  agency  of  Jesus,  the  Psalm 
becomes  predictive  of  Jesus." 


MESSIANIC   PASSAGES   IN   THE   PROPHETS. 

LITERATURE. 

Prophecy. 

Prophecy  viewed  iu  respect  to  its  Distinctive  Nature,  etc.  P. 
Fairbairn. 

Structure,  Use,  and  Interpretation  of  Propliecy.     J.  Davison. 

Propliets  and  Kings  of  O   T.     F.  D.  Maurice. 

Ruling  Ideas  in  Early  Ages,  Lecture  I,  J.  B.  Mozley. 

History  of  Israel,  vol.  1.     H.  Ewald. 

Introduction  to  O.  T.     .J.  Bleek. 

Smith's  Bib.  Die.  Art.  Prophet. 

Alexander's  Kitto  Encyc,  Art.  Prophet. 

Imperial  Dictionary,  Art.  Prophets.     P.  Fairbairn. 

McClintock  and  Strong's  Ency.,  Art.  Prophet. 

The  Prophets  of  Israel  and  their  place  in  history  to  the  close  of 
the  8th  century,  B.C.     W.  Robertson  Smith. 


48 


Prophets  of  the  O.  T.,  vol.  1.     H.  Ewald. 

Moses  aud  the  Prophets.     W.  H.  Green. 

The  Prophets  and  Prophecy  in  Isi*ael.     A.  Kueiien. 

Prolegomena  Zur  Geschichte  Israels.     J.  Wellhaiisen. 

Daniel  the  Prophet.     E.  B.  Pusey. 

The  Typology  of  Scripture.     P.  Fairbairn. 

COMMENTARIES. 

On  Isaiah.  Alexander,  Delitzsch,  Lange,  Speaker's, 
Cheyne,  Barnes,  Cowles,  Birks,  Gesenius,  Knobel,  Hitzig, 
Umbreit.  Essay  by  Cheyne,  in  vol.  2,  Isaiah  and  his 
Commentators. 

On  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations.  Speaker's,  Lange, 
Keil,  Burroughs,  Henderson,  Scholz,  Hitzig,  Graf. 

On  Ezekiel.  Fairbairn,  Lange,  Speaker's,  Htlvernick, 
Hengstenberg. 

On  Daniel.  Lange,  Speaker's,  Stuart,  Keil,  Cowles, 
Havernick. 

On  Mitior  Prophets.  Lange,  Speaker's,  Keil  and 
Delitzsch,  Pusey,  Henderson. 

Hosea.     WUnsche,  Pocock,  Umbreit,  Hitzig. 

Joel.     Wiinsche,  Credner,  A.  Merx. 

Jonah.     Kalisch,  King,  Perowne  T.  T. 

Zechariah.  Wright,  Lowe,  A.  Koehler,  W.  Pressel, 
T.  Kliefoth. 

Malachi.     L.  Reinke,  A.  Koehler,  W.  Pressel. 

QUOTATIONS   FROM   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Old  Testament  Synonyms.     R.  B.  Girdlestone. 

Principles  of  New  Testament  Quotation.     J., Scott. 

Hebraisms  in  the  Greek  Testament.  W.  H.  Guille- 
mard. 

Steward's  Mediatorial  Sovereignty.  Vol  1,  Part  L 
Bib.  Sacra,  vol.  23,  art.  bv  W.  Calkins. 

The  O.  T.  iji  the  New.     D.  McTurpie. 

The  Gospel  in  the  Law.     C  Taylor. 

Quotations  from  the  O.  T.  in  the  New.  B.  Jowett. 
(Theol.  Essays.) 

HEKMENEUTICS. 

Sacied  Hermeneutics.     S.  Davidson. 

Grundriss  der  biblischen  Hermeneutik.    J.  D.  Lange. 


49 

Biblical  Hermeneutics.     S.  M.  Terry. 

'•  "•  EUicott  and  Harslui. 

*'  "  Seller. 

Home's  Introduction,  vol.  2,  Part  II.  (13th  edition). 
Hermeneutics.     P.  Fairbairn. 

MESSIANIC    PROPHECY. 

Christology  of  the  O.  T.,  etc.     E.  W.  Hengstenberg. 

Die  Messianischen  Weisagungen  bei  den  grosseii  nnd 
kleinen  Propheten  des  Alten  Testaments,  vols.  1-4.  L. 
Reinke. 

O.  T.  Prophecy.     Stanley  Leathes. 

Witness  of  the  O.  T.  to  Christ.     Stanley  Leathes. 

O.  T.  History  of  Redemption.     Franz  Delitzsch. 

Messianic  Pi'ophecies.     Franz  Delitzsch. 

The  Religion  of  the  Cln-ist.     S.  Leathes. 

The  Witness  of  History  to  Christ.     F.  W.  Farrar. 

Christ  and  other  Masters.     C.  Hardwick. 

Messianic  Prophecy.     Edward  Riehni. 

The  Jewish  Messiah.     J.  Drummond. 

Theology  of  the  O.  T.     G.  F.  Oehler. 

The  Ideal  Isaiah.  The  Expositor,  1883,  art.  by  E. 
H.  Plum[)tre. 

Premium  Essay  on  Prophetic  Symbols.     Winthrop. 

The  Symbolical  Nundjers  of  Scripture.     White. 

MONOGRAPHS. 

The  Servant  of  Jehovah.     W.  Urwick. 

Der  Knecht  Jehovas.  Hertzog's  Ency.,  von  F. 
Oehler. 

The  Jewish  Interpretation  on  Isa.  liii.  Ad.  Neu- 
bauer  and  S.  R.  Driver. 

LIST   OF    MESSIANIC    1»ASSAGES    IN    THE    PROPHETS. 

Critics  differ  as  to  the  number  of  such  passages,  and 
as  to  the  key  for  a  correct  selection.  The  student  will 
find  a  very  full  list  in  the  tirst  index  of  Hengstenberg's 
Christology    (vol.  4),   together   with    the    corresponding 


50 

quot'ations  in  the  New  Testament.  In  a  broad  sense  all 
prophecy  is  Messianic  ;  but  as  the  purpose  of  this  syllabus 
is  to  consider  only  those  which  pertain  to  Messiah's  per- 
son and  position,  many  which  refer  to  his  kingdom  inclu- 
sive of  Jews  and  Gentiles  will  be  omitted.  Of  the  list 
subjoined,  we  shall  select  but  a  few,  chiefly  those  which 
we  deem  the  most  important.  Nor  need  we  disturb  our- 
selves as  to  any  chronological  order,  inasmuch  as  the  date 
of  a  prophecy  does  not  disturb  the  fact.  Questions  of 
date  and  authorship  will  therefore  be  disregarded. 

LIST. —  THE   GEEATEK   PROPHETS. 

Isaiah,  ch.  vii.  14-16 ;  viii.  23 ;  ix.  7 ;  xi.  1 ;  xii.  6 ; 
xxviii.  16 ;  xlii.  1-9 ;  xlix.  1-9 ;  1.  4-11 ;  li.  1-16 ;  lii.  13 ; 
liii.  12 ;  Iv.  1-5 ;  Ixi.  1-3. 

Jeremiah,  ch.  xxiii.  2-8 ;  xxx.  9. 

Ezekiel,  ch.  xxi.  27  ;  xxxiv.  23-31. 

THE   MINOK    PROPHETS. 

Hosea,  iii.  4-5 ;  xi.  1. 
Micah  V  ;  vii.  7-20. 

Zech.  ii.  14-17 ;  iii.  8-10 ;  iv ;  vi.  12-15 ;  ix.  9-10 ;  xi. 
4-17  ;  xii.  1-13. 

Malaehi,  iii.  1-6. 

Daniel,  ii.  34-35 ;  vii.  13-14 ;  ix.  24-27. 

MESSIANIC    PASSAGES   IN   ISAIAH. 

Isa.  vii.  14-16. 

Alexander's  Com.  in  loco.     Very  full. 

Hermeneutical  Manual,  pp.  456-466.     P.  Fairbairn. 

Die  Weissagung  von  der  Jungfrau  und  vom  Imman- 
uel.     L.  Reinke. 

The  Messianic  Interpretation  of  the  Prophecies  of 
Isaiah.     R.  P.  Srnith.     Ser.  I. 

The  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the  Messiah.  A.  Eder- 
sheim,  vol.  2,  Appendices  I,  II,  VII,  VIII,  IX,  XI. 


51 

The  prophecies  of  Isaiah  give  a  fuller  description  of 
tlie  personality  and  work  of  the  Messiah  than  those  of  any 
other  prophet.  Hence  he  is  called  the  Evangelistic 
Prophet.  Our  purpose  omits  any  careful  historical 
criticism  as  to  the  date  and  authorship  of  the  prophecies 
contained  in  the  book  which  bears  his  name,  as  it  does 
not  affect  materially  the  simple  question,  What  does  this 
book  teach  concerning  the  Messiah? 

The  passage,  vii.  14-16,  when  accurately  translated 
reads  as  follows  :  — 

Therefore,  the  Lord  himself  shall  give  you  a  sign: 
Behold  the  virgin  (or  marriageable  young  woman)  has 
conceived,  or  is  with  child,*  and  is  bringing  forth  a  son, 
and  thou  (or  shef)  shalt  call  his  name  Immanuel  (God 
with  us).  Curdled  milk  shall  be  eat,  (because  the  land 
is  waste,  vs.  22)  for  his  knowing  {i.e.,  until  he  knows  or 
about  the  time  of  his  knowing  (former  Alex.,  latter  Nag.) 
to  reject  the  evil  and  to  choose  the  good.  (But  no  longer 
Alex.)  For  before  he  shall  know  (how)  to  reject  the 
evil  and  to  choose  the  good,  the  land  shall  be  forsaken 
(desolate)  from  whose  two  kings  thou  art  terribly  afraid. 
The  two  kings  are  evidently  those  of  Syria  and  Israel. 

The  passage  by  its  setting,  by  its  peculiar  structure, 
by  its  verbal  difficulties,  and  by  the  use  made  of  it  in 
Matt.  i.  23,  as  fulfilled  in  the  birth  of  Christ,  is  exceed- 
ingly perplexing.  No  solution  of  it  by  commentators, 
thus  far,  is  perfectly  satisfactory.  Perhaps  all  the  diffi- 
culties connected  with  it  will  never  be  removed.  We  can 
do  no  more  than  present  a  probable  exegesis  with  a  sum- 
mary of  the  views  of  the  various  schools  of  interpreters. 
Our  first  task  is  with  the  text  itself. 

The  word  translated  -  virgin '  in  A.  V.  is  derived 
from  a  word  signifying  'to  hide,'  'to  conceal,'  (Tregelles, 
Pusey),  or  from  a  word  signifying  '  to  be  ripe,'  '  to  be 
mature,'  '  marriageable,'  (Fuerst,  Ges.,  Cheyne,  and 
others).  The  Sept.,  in  spite  of  the  difficulty,  translates 
it  'virgin'  here,  as  also  Gen.  xxiv.  43,  though  in  Ex.  ii. 
8,  where  the  word  is  in  the  singular,  it  translates  by 
'  maiden,*  and  likewise  Prov.  xxx.  19.    Tlie  word  is  found 

*  Gen.  xvi.  11.    t  Ges.  p.  184. 


0^ 

in  the  plural  in  Bs.  Ixviii.  26 ;  Cant.  i.  3,  and  vi.  8,  trans- 
lated hy  Sept.  '  maidens.'  In  all  the  passages  where  the 
Hebrew  word  in  the  singular  or  plural  is  found  in  the 
O.  T.,  the  word  by  its  connection  implies  an  unmarried 
woman,  and  by  implication  also  a  vir^o  intaeta,  unless  one 
wishes  to  interpret  into  it  a  bad  sense.  ''A  virgin  or 
unmarried  woman  is  designated  as  distinctly  as  she  could 
be  by  a  single  word."  (Alex.)  The  strict  Hebrew  word 
for  '  virgin  '  is  '  b'thuldh: 

The  phrase  '  has  conceived '  or  '  is  with  child,'  in  the 
former  case  the  verb,  in  the  latter  an  adjective,  and  the 
phrase  '  is  bringing  forth,'  are  the  prophetic  of  completed 
action.  If  they  refer  here  to  some  one  present,  or  some 
one  then  living,  then  the  woman  was  already  pregnant, 
and  if  the  scene  is  a  prophetic  vision,  the  fact  of  an 
unmarried  woman  with  child  is  as  clearly  expressed.  So 
far  as  prophetic  usage  will  aid  us,  the  expressions  would 
be  as  pertinent  to  one  who  should  be  pregnant  centuries 
hence  as  a  month  ago ;  i.e.,  to  those  who  recognize  the 
possibility  of  prophecy.  The  word  Immanuel  is  elsewhere 
used  in  the  Old  Testament  but  twice,  evidently  referring 
in  each  case  to  this  child.  Isa.  viii.  8,  and  viii.  10.  In 
viii.  8,  ''Shall  fill  the  breadth  of  thy  land,  O  Immanuel," 
we  have  for  this  child,  "an  ejaculatory  prayer  for  the 
deliverer's  advent."  (Cheyne).  But  it  expresses  the 
additional  thought  that  the  land  is  Immanuel's,  his  by 
right.  This  child  is  the  sovereign  of  the  land.  In  viii. 
10  there  is  a  play  upon  the  word,  ""With  us  is  Q-od,'' 
implying  that  in  the  name  itself  there  was  the  greatest 
comfort  to  the  people.  Ps.  xlvi.  7,  11.  In  Isa.  ix.  6-7, 
this  same  child  is  evidently  referred  to,  clothed  with  the 
attributes  of  Deity. 

The  expression  "  curdled  milk  and  honey  shall  he  eat 
until  he  knows,"  etc.,  vs.  22,  sq.,  indicates  that  up  to  a  cer- 
tain time  such  shall  be  his  nourishment,  the  time  being 
left  indefinite  ;  if  of  a  child  soon  to  be  born,  within  a  few 
years,  (^How  fulfilled !)  or  at  that  time,  i.e.,  when  he  has 
reached  the  age  of  moral  discretion,  such  shall  be  his 
food,  as  an  index  of  the  condition  of  the  land.  Though 
a  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey,  Deut.  xxxii.  13-14, 
would  be  a  land  possessing  the  means  of  support  without 


h3 

tillage,  it  is  spoken  of  in  this  way  prior  to  the  possession 
of  Canaan  simply  as  an  index  of  fertility ;  but  after  the 
land  was  occupied  by  Israel,  "the  natural  emblem  of 
abundance,"  as  Alexander  says,  "  would  no  longer  be 
milk  and  honey ^  but  cor7i  and  wine^  ov  flesh  Q,nd  fruits,  so 
that  the  prospect  of  subsisting  on  the  tirst  two,  if  it  did 
not  suggest  tlie  idea  of  personal  privation,  would  suggest 
that  of  general  desolation,  or  at  least  that  of  interrupted 
or  suspended  cultivation."  The  meaning  of  privation  or 
desolation  is  sufficiently  obvious  by  a  comparison  of  the 
phrase  here  with  the  corresponding  one  in  vs.  22. 

The  16th  verse  is  the  most  difficult  of  all.  The 
structure  of  the  verse  is  obscure.  The  expression  '  the 
land '  may  mean  the  whole  of  Palestine,  the  Northern 
Kingdom  alone,  or  the  Southern  Kingdom  alone.  The 
terminus  ad  quern  seems  to  be  the  moral  consciousness  of 
this  child.  And  if  a  literal  historical  fulfilment  is  exacted, 
requiring  the  desolation  of  a  part  of  the  land  or  of  the 
whole  of  it  by  the  Assyrian  hordes  within  this  short 
period,  it  is  simply  an  impossibility.  No  straining  of  his- 
tory will  verify  such  an  explanation.  But  if  the  whole 
prophecy  be  put  into  the  class  of  typical  or  symbolical 
propliecy,  the  grave  difficulty  of  this  verse  may  be  obvi- 
ated. Ahaz  would  not  stand  the  test  of  the  supernatural, 
and  a  supernatural  event  is  announced  on  the  part  of 
Jehovah,  which  would  bring  into  the  clearest  light  the 
meaning  of  the  original  promise  to  Eve,  '"•the  seed  of  the 
wornanr  The  burden  of  prophecy  for  the  ages  may  now 
lind  its  fullest  expression  in  the  virgin-born  son.  But 
before  that  great  event,  the  two  kingdoms  of  which  Israel 
was  composed,  Judah  and  Ephraim,  will  become  desolate, 
and  those  who  call  good  evil  and  evil  good  (vs.  20),  will 
have  brought  the  land  into  such  degradation  that 
Jehovah  must  interfere  by  His  Immanuel,  who  knows 
liow  to  choose  between  good  and  evil,  and  can  teach 
others  also.  So  considered,  the  prophecy  is  essentially 
typical  and  the  language  is  to  be  interpreted  in  that  way. 

We  do  not  say  that  the  above  interpretation  is  the 
correct  one,  but  it  commends  itself  to  us  for  the  following 
reasons.  1.  It  seems  to  account  in  the  best  way  for  the 
sign  which  Jehovah  gave  Ahaz. 


54 

The  prophet,  acting  under  the  authority  of  Jehovah, 
in  order  to  deter  Ahaz  from  seeking  foreign  help  in  the 
impending  troubles,  and  to  assure  him  that  Jehovah  him- 
self was  an  alhsufticient  help,  oifers  him  the  boon  of  seek- 
ing a  supernatural  sign  in  the  heavens  above  or  in  the 
earth  beneath.  He  would  grant  him  what  he  did  to 
Hezekiah  subsequently,  a  supernatural  index  of  his  readi- 
ness to  interfere  on  his  behalf.  Ahaz,  with  his  own  plans 
arranged  in  his  mind  to  seek  Assyrian  aid,  very  piously, 
yet  very  contemptuously,  rejects  the  offer.  Whereupon 
the  prophet  is  ordered  to  give  a  sign,  seemingly  an  infalli- 
ble sign,  a  sign  condemning  the  impiety  of  Ahaz  and  that  of 
the  house  of  David,  the  sign  of  the  ages,  the  long-expected, 
marvellously-endowed  Israelite,  a  miraculously-produced 
child.  That  child  should  be  the  one  for  whom  the  nation 
had  been  longing  during  all  its  history.  It  had  been  the 
hope  of  Abraham  and  the  hope  of  David.  And  even 
Micah,  a  contemporary  of  Isaiah  saw  a  similar  deliverance 
(Micah  V.  3).  Isaiah  also  had  spoken  in  a  similar  way 
(Isa.  iv.  2).  Ahaz  knew  of  such  prophecies  as  well  as 
the  nation.  And  if  he  wanted  an  assurance  of  delivery 
from  his  foes,  or  if  the  prophet  wished  to  overthrow  his 
scepticism,  nothing  could  be  more  effective  than  the 
announcement  that  the  Messiah  would  come.  Thus  the 
sign  as  often  elsewhere  was  in  the  divine  assertion.  It 
was  to  be  accepted  on  the  word  of  Jehovah,  and  the  ful- 
filment of  that  word  would  be  its  verification.  Thus  a 
sign  was  given  to  Moses  in  Horeb,  that  Jehovah  would 
release  Israel  from  Egypt,  by  the  assertion,  "  Ye  shall 
serve  God  upon  this  mountain."  But  Moses  was  com- 
pelled to  take  the  word  of  Jehovah  as  a  sufficiency  until 
the  event  proved  its  truth,  which  was  a  long  time  subse- 
quently. So  also  in  Isa.  xxxvii.  30  a  sign  is  announced 
to  Hezekiah  which  could  not  have  been  realized  until  the 
invading  army  was  overthrown.  So  also  to  Gideon, 
Judges  vi.  37-40.  Ahaz  was  told  to  ask  for  a  supernatural 
sign,  and  declined,  and  God  promises  a  supernatural  sign, 
not  by  the  miraculous  birth  of  a  child  in  the  near  present, 
nor  by  the  birth  of  a  child  from  the  natural  order  of 
things,  from  one  who  at  that  time  was  an  unmarried 
woman,  as  many  suppose,  but  by  a  promise  which  Ahaz 


00 

could  uiideistaiul,  and  would  meet  the  case,  near  in  time 
to  the  prophet's  vision,  perhaps,  but  afar  off  in  the  divine 
purpose.  From  the  language  of  the  text,  it  is  not  necesr 
sary,  therefore,  to  place  the  fnltilment  of  the  prophecy  in 
the  time  of  Ahaz  :  although  if  that  demand  was  admitted, 
whoever  the  symbolic  child  might  be,  he  would  adum- 
brate the  Greater  than  he.  But  as  Ahaz  was  invited  to 
ask  for  the  supernatural,  we  expect  the  fact  of  the  super- 
natural to  be  brought  out,  when  Jehovah  takes  the  mat- 
ter into  his  own  hand. 

2.  The  antithesis  of  this  passage  with  the  previous 
verses  suggests  the  broad  and  symbolic  meaning. 

Syria  and  Israel  had  combined  against  Judah  for  her 
subjugation.  It  would  be  virtually  the  overthrow  of  a 
dynasty  in  which  rested  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  with  the 
house  of  David.  Ahaz  cared  not  a  groat  for  this,  but 
Jehovah  did  care.  And  He  commissions  Isaiah  to  assure 
Ahaz  that  his  schemes  will  miscarry.  Ahaz  himself  shall 
suffer  in  his  family  and  in  his  throne,  but  for  the  preser- 
vation of  the  kingdom  of  the  house  of  David,  a  sign  shall 
be  given,  a  sign  in  contrast,  a  sign  infallible,  that  God  pur- 
posed to  preserve  inviolate  His  promise  to  His  chosen 
David.  This  sign  shall  be  a  son,  a  son  of  the  virgin,  not 
a  virgin,  a  son  who  should  be  the  predestined  heir  of 
David's  throne,  compared  with  whom,  "  the  head  of  Syria 
which  is  Damascus,  and  the  head  of  Damascus  which  is 
Rezin ;  and  the  head  of  Ephraim  is  Samaria,  and  the  head 
of  Samaria  is  the  son  of  Remaliah,"  these  and  nothing 
more,  earthly  cities  and  frail  men,  are  vanity :  a  predic- 
tion which  Matthew  takes  up  and  asserts  to  have  been 
accomplished  in  the  birth  of  Messiah,  inasmuch  as  these 
kings  and  these  kingdoms  bad  long  before  Messiah's 
advent  ceased  to  be. 

3.  The  difficulties  connected  with  other  interpreta- 
tions of  the  passage  seem  to  be  more  grave  than  those 
in  the  one  suggested.  In  other  words  a  choice  of  difficul- 
ties, for  such  there  are  to  every  explanation  of  it,  favors 
at  least  the  one  proposed,  (a)  The  early  Jewish  com- 
mentators affirmed  that  the  child  to  be  born  was  Heze- 
kiah.  But  according  to  the  chronolog}^  of  the  Scriptures, 
Hezekiah  was  at  the  time  of  the  prophecy  from  nine  to 


56 

twelve  years  old.  II  Kings  xvi.  2,  and  xviii.  2.  See 
Tlienius,  Keil,  Ewald,  and  Bible  Cora.  Besides  how  could 
such  a  natural  birth  be  a  sign  of  assurance  to  Ahaz  under 
the  circumstances? 

Later  Jewish  commentators  point  to  a  child  from  the 
wife  of  Ahaz  or  the  wife  of  Isaiah.  But  is  there  any  evi- 
dence that  at  the  time  of  the  prophecy  either  of  these 
women  was  an  unmarried  woman  ?  The  same  objections 
meet  the  modern  critics  who  accept  the  theory  of  these 
Jewish  commentators. 

(5)  Some  suppose  (Hitzig,  Niig.)  that  the  mother  of 
the  child  was  some  woman  present  at  the  time  of  the 
prophecy  to  whom  Isaiah  pointed.  If  she  were  already 
pregnant,  illegitimately  as  Nagelsbach  maintains,  the 
theory  is  a  shock  to  our  moral  sensibilities,  and  would  be 
a  violation  of  the  law  of  God  in  such  cases.  If  he  pointed 
to  some  one  who  was  now  unmarried,  but  who  in  the 
normal  way  was  to  be  the  mother  of  a  child  or  the  child, 
seemingly  the  sign  would  be  of  little  value  to  Ahaz.  If 
as  Cheyne  asserts  the  article  with  the  noun  is  the  article 
of  species,  and  we  may  read,  an  unmarried  woman,  what 
wonder-sign  can  be  attached  to  the  assertion?  Any 
unmarried  woman,  by  becoming  married  may  become  the 
mother  of  this  wonderful  boy !  Of  course !  Nothing 
novel  or  strange  to  Ahaz !  The  same  difficulty,  however, 
is  made  less  difficult  by  adhering  to  the  text.  Neither 
view  obviates  the  surface  interpretation  that  Ahaz  was 
met  by  an  assertion  involving  a  supernatural  act. 

(c)  Another  view,  which  carries  with  it  most  honor- 
able names  is  that  the  prophet  speaks  according  to  the 
theory  of  double  sense :  i.e.^  that  he  refers  really  to  two 
things,  two  virgin  mothers  and  two  infants  born,  the  first 
mother  and  child  living  in  the  days  of  Ahaz,  the  second 
at  the  Christian  era.  Vss.  15,  16  refer  to  the  child  born 
in  the  days  of  Ahaz ;  vs.  14  to  the  true  Immanuel,  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  The  first  series  of  events  is  supposed 
to  be  typical  of  the  second.  But  this  view  is  contrary  to 
the  law  of  growth  in  prophecy.  That  law  would  require 
vss.  15  and  16  to  precede  vs.  14.  Especially  is  this  law 
the  law  of  Isaiah's  prophecy.  Moreover,  how  can  two 
virgin  mothers  be  the  virgin  ?     Were  there  two  miraculous 


57 

acts?  If  not,  how  can  one  prefigure  the  other?  There 
niiglit  be  some  immediate  event  which  foreshadowed  a 
sublimer  event,  but  as  the  text  stands,  the  law  of  growth 
is  decidedly  at  variance  with  this  merely  typical  theory. 

(c?)  On  the  whole,  without  claiming  certainty,  the 
view  we  have  suggested  seems  to  be  relieved  of  many  of 
the  objections  with  which  the  other  theories  are  encum- 
bered. If  we  connect  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  in  this 
group,  we  have  the  Messiah  in  his  human  nature  at  least, 
in  ch.  iv,  originating  from  a  virgin  in  ch.  vii,  born  with  all 
the  glory  of  divine  attributes  in  ch.  ix,  an  indivisible  triad 
of  consolatory  images  in  three  separate  stages  preparatoiy 
to  his  reign  which  is  described  in  ch.  xi.  And  into  this 
passage  we  may  read  with  Christian  reverence,  "  Now  all 
this  is  come  to  pass,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled,  which  was 
si)oken  by  the  Lord  through  the  prophet,  saying.  Behold 
the  virgin  shall  be  with  child  and  shall  bring  forth  a  son. 
and  they  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel,  which  is  being 
interpreted,  God  w.ith  us."     Matt.  i.  22-23.* 

Isaiah  ix.  5-6. 

Translatiini.  For  a  chikl  is  born  to  us  (e.e.,  for  our 
benefit),  a  son  is  given  to  us  (i.e.,  by  Jehovah),  and  the 
government  is  upon  his  shoulder  (i.e..,  as  a  burden,  as  Ids 
robe  of  office)  ;  and  his  name  is  called,  or  they  call  his 
name  (i.e.,  in  the  name  will  be  the  character  specified).  Won- 
der, Counsellor,  Mighty  God,  Everlasting  Father,  Prince 
of  Peace :  for  (or  witli  reference  to)  the  increase  of  the 
government  (art.  in  both  cases  definite),  and  for  peace 
there  is  no  end,  upon  the  throne  of  David  and  upon  his 
kingdom,  to  establish  it  (i.e.,  his  kingdom),  and  to  sup- 
port it,  in  justice  and  in  righteousness,  from  henceforth 
and  forever ;  the  zeal,  or  jealousy  of  Jehovah  Sabaoth 
shall  do  this. 

In  the  context  (vss.  1-4),  the  prophet  has  drawn  a 
vivid  picture  of  the  rescue  of  Israel  from  their  foes,  and 
the  marvellous  change  which  takes  place,  as  the  result. 
Those  most  distressed  by  the  Assyrian  invasions,  Zebu- 
Ion  and  Naphtali,  they  liaving  suffered  the  longest,  are  t<j 

*  Matthew  <iuotes  from  the  Sept- 


58 

pass  quickly  from  darkness  to  light,  and  revel  in  joyful 
harvests.  This  event  in  prophetic  vision  has  already  been 
realized,  the  spiritual  antitype  of  which  according  to 
Matt.  iv.  14-16,  was  the  preaching  of  Christ  to  the  dark- 
ened Galileans.  The  prophet  then  passes  from  the  effects 
of  this  divine  interposition  to  the  agents  using  language  of 
the  boldest  characterization.  If  we  interpret  the  verses 
by  clauses,  we  have  (a)  His  hirth  as  already  having  taken 
place  in  the  prophetic  conception.  See  Driver  %  Hebrew 
Tenses,  §  81.  (J)  His  government  —  not  merely  of  Israel 
and  Judah,  but  by  the  parallel  passage,  Micah  v.  3-5,  of 
the  world,  (c)  His  title,  i.e.,  by  Isaiah's  usage  of  the 
verb  translated  '  called,'  his  characteristics.  Is.  i.  26  ;  vii. 
14 ;  Ix.  14 ;  Jer.  xi.  16.  Perhaps  there  is  here  an  example 
of  the  assumption  of  a  new  name  when  one  is  called  to 
the  throne.  II  Kings  xxiii.  14 ;  xxiv.  17.  The  peculiar- 
ity in  this  name  is  its  length,  or  rather  its  particulars. 
"  It  suggests,"  as  Cheyne  says,  "  the  extraordinary  (Charac- 
ter of  its  bearer.  It  reminds  us  of  -the  long  honorific 
names  of  Egyptian  kings,  (^.  g.  in  the  Treaty  of  Peace, 
Records  of  the  Past,  vol.  iv.  27,  where  the  royal  titles  of 
Rameses  II.  take  up  six  lines.)"  But  it  is  a  query  with 
critics  whether  in  the  name  given  to  this  Prince  of  Peace, 
we  have  five  separate  names,  or,  as  Ewald  prefers,  "  two 
pairs  of  compound  names  united,  describing  the  character 
of  Messiah  first  from  within  and  then  from  without."  In 
this  way  the  Wonder-Counsellor  corresponds  to  Everlast- 
ing Father,  as  descriptive  of  the  Messiah  at  home  or  in 
his  nature,  while  God  the  Hero  corresponds  to  Prince  of 
Peace  as  indicative  of  his  work,  in  executing  his  plans. 
If  we  interpreted  according  to  this  ingenious  division,  by 
Wonder-Counsellor  is  meant,  a  supernatural  counsellor, 
one  whose  sagacity  transcends  human  experience.  The 
word  for  '  Wonder,'  in  usage,  most  frequently  refers  to 
the  supernatural.  By  '  God  the  Mighty  One  '  is  meant  a 
Mighty  Hero  charging  against  his  enemies  and  defending 
his  friends,  clothed  in  the  power  of  Deity.  The  word 
here  for  God,  El,  in  Isaiah  always  denotes  God  as  power 
absolutely.  "  It  is  never  used  hyperbolically  or  meta- 
phorically." Cheyne.  Isa.  x.  21.  'By  'Everlasting 
Father '  is  meant  a  prince  ruling  as  a  Father,  and  ruling 


59 

us  long  as  his  rule  endures :  eternal  in  the  broadest  sens6 
if  the  subjects  of  the  government  needed  such  a  rule.  By 
'Prince  of  Peace '  is  meant  a  Prince  whose  victories  shall 
be  won  and  whose  government  shall  be  controlled  in  the 
interests  of  truth  and  rigliteousness.  No  sword  but  truth. 
Ps.  Ixxii ;  Zech.  ix.  10  ;  Micah  v.  5. 

If  we  give  to  the  Prince  here  named,  the  jive  names, 
we  reach  substantially  the  same  result,  though  it  is  to  be 
admitted  that  it  is  not  in  harmony  with  the  Scriptural 
(lesignation  of  names.  We  then  have  five  predicate 
accusatives  to  the  verb  '  call.'  By  '  Wonder  '  is  indicated 
an  extraordinary  person,  one  beyond  the  range  of  human 
events:  by  'Counsellor,'  a  person  of  supernatural  wisdom 
in  adjusting  the  rights  of  his  people,  Isa.  xi.  2 :  by  '  God 
the  Mighty  One,'  one  who  is  as  powerful  as  God  to  aid.  his 
people  in  their  conflicts  and  trials:  by  'Everlasting  Father,' 
one  with  a  fatherly  heart  and  that  eternally  :  by  '  Prince  of 
Peace,'  one  whose  dominion  has  for  its  aim  and  fruit, 
peace.  By  either  method  we  have  a  unique  description 
baffling  all  applications  to  any  one  other  than  He  who  is 
"  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords."  Rev.  xix.  16.  Even 
Kuenen  admits  that  the  strong  expression  '  God  the 
Mighty  One '  is  the  correct  translation,  though  he  would 
insert  the  preposition  of  similarity,  and  read,  '  like  God 
the  Mighty  One."  But  there  is  no  such  preposition  in  the 
text.  Nor  is  such  an  omission  in  harmony  with  the 
style  of  Isaiah  when  enumerating  characteristics.  That 
such  a  bold  title  might  be  given  to  the  Messiah  according 
to  the  Messianic  teaching  of  the  O.  T.,  see  Gen  xxii.  11- 
12 ;  Ex.  iii.  2,  4,  6,  14 ;  Gen.  xxxi.  11,  13 ;  Ps.  xlv.  6 ; 
ex.  1. 

{d)  The  object  of  His  mission.  This  is  the  extension 
and  peaceful  confirmation  of  the  Davidic  kingdom.  His 
throne  is  the  throne  of  David.  He  is  to  be  David's  son. 
Mic.  V.  3.  It  is  to  be  a  kingdom  of  peace,  i.e.,  prosper- 
ous, thrifty  on  the  basis  of  justice  to  all.  It  is  to  be 
limitless,  locally  and  temporally.  It  is  to  be  universal  and 
eternal.  Isa.  xlix.  For  kindred  passages  on  the  above, 
see  II  Sam.  vii.  11-16 ;  I  Kings  viii.  25;  Psalm  ii ;  xlv; 
Ixxii ;  Ixxxix  ;  cxxxii ;  Jer.  xxiii.  5  ;  xxxiii.  15  ;  Jer.  xxx. 
9  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23-24  ;  xxxvii.  24  ;  Hos.  iii.  5.      Judaism 


60 

with  its  king  is  Cliristianity  with  its  Christ.  The  parallel 
l^assage  in  the  N.  T.  for  the  whole  picture  is  Luke  i.  32-33. 

(e)  Both  for  his  own  sake  and  also  for  his  people's, 
Jehovah  through  this  Prince  will  jealously  execute  his 
promises. 

Remark  1.  This  prophecy  was  accepted  by  the  ear- 
lier Rabbins  as  Messianic,  but  the  later  Rabbins  apply  it 
to  Hezekiah.  German  critics  are  very  much  divided  in 
opinion,  some  applying  it  exclusively  to  Hezekiah,  and 
some  allowing  it  to  be  ideally  Messianic,  but  referring  it 
primarily  to  Hezekiah.  See  Alexander  and  Reinke.  To 
reach  such  a  result  they  depend  mainly  upon  what  an 
ordinary  Hebrew  student  would  deem  a  maniacal  tor- 
turing of  the  language,  but  their  special  objections  to  an 
exclusive  Messianic  application  are  two :  (a)  because  it  is 
not  specifically  applied  to  Christ  in  the  N.  T.,  and  (6) 
because  the  prophet  could  have  had  no  other  than  Heze- 
kiah in  his  mind. 

Remark  2.  As  to  the  first  objection  it  is  valid  so  far 
as  any  verbal  use  of  the  language  by  the  N.  T.  writers  is 
concerned.  But  we  have  the  essential  thought  in  Luke 
i.  32-33.  And  were  it  not  quoted  even  in  an  essential 
thought,  nothing  would  be  proved  against  its  Messianic 
character  here.  The  writers  of  the  N.  T.  used  such  por- 
tions of  the  O.  T.  as  were  fitted  to  their  immediate  pur- 
pose. They  could  not  condense  the  whole  of  the  O.  T. 
into  the  New.  Though  a  very  marvellous  prophecy,  we 
know  of  no  occasion  in  the  life  of  Christ  which  called  for 
the  use  of  such  a  passage.  "  The  name  Jesus,"  says 
Delitzsch,  "  is  the  combination  of  all  the  O.  T.  titles,  used 
to  designate  the  Coming  One,  according  to  his  nature  and 
his  work." 

As  to  the  second  objection  we  may  reply  that  inspi- 
ration, to  those  who  believe  in  its  reality,  is  not  limited  to 
so  narrow  a  verge  as  these  critics  assert.  Moreover, 
granting  that  Hezekiah  might  have  been  in  the  prophet's 
mind,  the  language  cannot  be  strained  so  as  to  apply  to 
him.  without  the  grossest  exaggeration.  For  (a)  the 
tenses  in  the  verses  are  factitive  or  prophetic  presents. 
The  child  is  in  the  conception  of  the  prophet  already 
endowed  with   the  insignia  of   royalty.      The  word    for 


'  child '  is  elastic,  it  is  true,  being  used  for  one  just  born, 
or  for  one  who  has  reached  the  age  of  twent}^  but  in  the 
conception  of  the  prophet,  the  government  is  already 
upon  his  shoulders.  This  could  be  true  of  Christ,  but 
not  so  true  of  Hezekiah,  at  the  time  of  the  prophecy.  He 
was  not  more  than  twelve  years  old  at  the  time.  (6) 
Such  attributes  as  are  ascribed  to  this  Prince  could  not 
be  applied  fairly,  in  the  reverent  style  of  Scripture,  to  any 
mere  man.  (c)  Any  torturing  of  the  language,  by  a  play 
upon  the  accentuation,  so  as  to  render  it  applicable  to 
Jehovah,  as  the  giver  of  great  supernatural  power  to 
Hezekiah,  is  the  mere  resort  of  those  who  cannot  away 
with  the  idea  that  the  Messiah  was  to  be  superhuman. 
See  Del.  in  loco,  {d}  As  an  historical  fact  Hezekiah  was 
more  of  a  warrior  than  a  Prince  of  Peace.  He  waged  war 
against  others ;  his  kingdom  was  itself  invaded  and  sub- 
jected to  a  foreign  i)ower  from  which  he  afterward 
revolted. 

(e)  No  such  perpetuity  as  is  here  described  can  fairly 
be  ascribed  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  His  reign  was 
neither  peaceful,  progressive,  nor  perpetual.  Such  per- 
petuity as  is  here  spoken  of,  as  Alexander  says,  "  cannot 
be  the  joint-reign  of  himself  and  his  successors ;  for  the 
line  was  broken  at  the  Babylonish  exile.  It  cannot  be 
the  reign  of  the  Maccabees  or  Hasmonean  princes,  for 
these  were  not  the  sons  of  David  but  of  Levi.  The  pre- 
diction, if  fulfilled  at  all,  could  only  be  fulfilled  in  a  reign 
which  after  it  began  was  never  interrupted,  and  has  ever 
since  been  growing  in  extent  and  power.  Is  not  this  the 
reign  of  Christ?  " 

Isaiah  xi.  1-5. 

Translation.  1.  And  there  shall  go  forth  a  shoot 
from  the  stump  of  Jesse,  and  a  twig  (or  branch)  from  its 
roots  shall  bear  fruit.  2.  And  the  spirit  of  Jehovah  shall 
rest  upon  him,  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and  discernment,  a 
spirit  of  counsel  and  strength,  a  spirit  of  knowledge  and 
of  the  fear  of  Jehovah.  3.  And  his  sense  of  smelling, 
(i.e.,  his  pleasurable  perception)  is  in  the  fear  of  Jehovah, 
or  as  Ewald  "  his  breath  is  in  the  fear  of  Jehovah  ;  "  {i.e.. 


62 

reverence  for  Jehovah  is  the  vital  air  he  breathes)  ;  and 
(as  a  consequence)  he  shall  not  judge  according  to  the 
sight  of  his  eyes,  nor  decide  according  to  the  hearing  of 
his  ears.  4.  But  he  shall  judge  in  righteousness  the  help- 
less, and  decide  in  equity  (or  impartiality)  for  the  hum- 
ble of  the  earth ;  and  he  shall  smite  the  earth  *  with  the 
sceptre  of  his  mouth,  and  with  the  breath  of  his  lips  shall 
he  put  to  death  the  ungodly.  5.  And  righteousness  shall 
be  the  girdle  of  his  loins,  and  faithfulness  the  girdle  of  his 
reins. 

The  transition  from  chap.  x.  to  chap.  xi.  is  very  sug- 
gestive. Assyria  under  the  figure  of  a  forest  is  to  fall  for- 
ever. It  is  the  forest  of  Lebanon  with  which  Assyria  is 
compared,  a  cedar-forest,  which  sends  out  no  shoots,  and 
has  therefore  no  power  of  self-propagation.  When  it  falls 
its  mission  is  ended.  But  tliough  the  house  of  David  and 
the  Jewish  State  might  fall  into  decay,  and  become  like 
an  oak  whose  trunk  has  been  cut  off,  it  has  life  in  its  roots, 
and  from  the  roots  there  will  come  branches  and  fruit. 
The  i^rophet  gets  his  hope  for  his  people  in  the  divine 
selection  of  a  king  from  the  obscure  house  of  Jesse,  as 
unpromising  in  itself  as  the  twig  of  a  tree-stump,  and  por- 
trays the  character  of  a  king,  of  whom  David  was  but  a 
feeble  type.  As  David  sprang  from  the  obscure  family  of 
Jesse,  so  the  second  David  shall  arise  to  his  throne  from 
great  humiliation.  Such  was  the  fact  according  to  the 
genealogies  of  our  Lord  as  given  by  Matthew  and  Luke. 
Analyzing  the  whole  passage,  we  have  in  vs.  1,  The 
obscure  origin  of  this  king ;  in  vs.  2,  his  divine  qualifica- 
tions for  his  kingship ;  the  abiding  presence  of  the  spirit 
of  Jehovah,  keeping  him  intellectually,  practically,  and 
spiritually  en  rapport  with  Jehovah ;  (the  genitives  are 
the  genitive  of  effect)  :  in  vs.  3  his  impartiality  in  admin- 
istering his  government ;  in  vs.  4  his  righteousness,  and 
benevolence  in  defending  the  helpless  of  his  people  and 
overcoming  liis  enemies  and  their  enemies  by  his  truthful 
mandates  ;  Hos.  vi.  5  ;  Zech.  ix.  10  ;  Isa.  xlix.  2 :  in  vs.  5, 
by  the  emblem  of  the  girdle,  he  is  ready  for  every  emer- 
gency.    Justice  and  fidelity  girding  him  about  he  is  fully 

*  Some  change  the  text,  and  read  "  the  terrible-" 


63 

eciuipped  for  his  work,  and  is  tlie  prompt  executor  of  the 
divine  will. 

Remark  1.  The  emblem  of  the  twig  and  shoot  should 
be  associated  with  the  emblem  of  the  sprout  found  else- 
where as  a  delineation  of  the  Messiah.  The  words  are 
not  the  same  here  as  elsewhere,  but  the  idea  is  the  same. 
See  Jer.  xxiii.  5,  6,  "  Behold  the  days  are  coming,  saith 
Jehovah,  that  I  will  awake  unto  David,  a  righteous 
sprout."  "And  this  will  be  the  name  by  which  they  will 
call  him,  Jehovah  ouii  Righteousness. "  Also  Zecli. 
iii.  8,  "I  will  bring  forth  my  servant,  the  Sprout;'"'  Zech. 
vi.  12,  "  Behold  a  man  whose  name  is  Sprout.'" 

Remark  2.  The  terms  used  for  the  spiritual  endow- 
ment of  this  king  are  sometimes  divided  into  pairs,  and 
Delitzsch  finds  in  them  (Mes.  Prophecies),  the  seven 
spirits  of  Jehovah,  resting  '  cTiarismatically '  upon  him, 
corresponding  to  the  seven-lighted  candlestick.  Rev.  i. 
4 ;  iv.  5 ;  v.  6 ;  Ex.  xxv.  17  ;  Zech.  iv.  2.  A  sharp  dis- 
tinction in  the  synonyms  used  will  give  a  beautiful  varia- 
tion in  his  qualifications,  but  the  tout  ensemble  is  suffi- 
cient ;  empowering  him  intellectually^  practically^  and 
spiritually.  "  He  wliom  God  hath  sent,  speaketh  the 
words  of  God ;  for  he  giveth  not  the  spirit  by  measure." 
John  iii.  34. 

Remark  3.  Paul  in  II  Thess.  ii.  8,  applies  the  last 
clause  of  vs.  4,  to  the  destruction  of  Anti-Christ  or  the 
Lawless  One,  at  the  coming  of  Christ.  The  quotation  is 
evidently  a  quotation  of  accommodation,  though  the 
promise  in  vs.  4,  as  to  the  overthrow  of  the  enemies  of  the 
king,  includes  all  of  every  class. 

Remark  4.  The  application  of  this  passage  to  any 
other  than  the  Christ  is  extremely  difficult.  It  has  been 
referred  to  Hezekiah,  to  Zerubbabel,  and  to  the  Macca- 
bees. But  Hezekiah  sprang  from  a  house  whose  condi- 
tion could  not  be  described  as  a  root  or  twig  from  a 
broken-down  or  severed  trunk.  Nor  did  he  ever  reach 
even  in  imagination  a  reign  so  paradisaic  as  this  is  repre- 
sented to  be  in  vss.  6-9.  The  Maccabees  were  not 
descendants  of  the  house  of  Jesse,  and  the  leadership  of 
Zerubbabel  produced  no  such  marvellous  results.  Hence 
with  a  peculiar  uniformity  critics  have  allowed  to  this 


64 

passage  the  authority  of  being  Messianic.  As  Henderson 
says,  "  The  exposition  given  of  the  first  verse  in  the  Tar- 
gum,  'And  the  king  shall  come  forth  from  the  sons  of 
Jesse,  and  the  Messiah  shall  grow  up  from  his  sons'  sons,' 
has  been  sustained  and  defended  by  Jarchi,  Abarbanel, 
and  Kimchi;  by  the  best  biblical  scholars  since  the 
Reformation,  especially  among  the  moderns  *  *  * 
and  even  Eichhorn,  Gesenius,  and  Hitzig  are  forced  to 
fall  in  with  such  an  application,  though,  as  might  be 
expected,  they  only  recognize  their  ideal  Messiah  in  this 
chapter." 

OTHER   MESSIANIC    PASSAGES    IN    ISAIAH  XII-XXXV. 

These  are  chiefly  known  to  us  as  such  by  the  use 
made  of  them  in  the  N.  T.  Several  of  them  have  a 
primary  and  more  particular  reference  to  the  people  of 
Israel  as  typical  of  the  church  as  the  body  of  Christ.  At 
least  they  harmonize  with  such  passages  in  the  second 
general  division  of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  as  they  indicate 
that  by  the  Servant  of  Jehovah  is  evidently  meant  the 
pious  Israel.  E.  g.  Isa.  xxv.  6-8  gives  a  picture  of  Zion 
as  the  source  of  moral  influence  for  the  whole  world ;  ch. 
xxviii.  16  compared  with  Rom.  ix.  33 ;  x.  11,  and  I  Pet. 
ii.  6,  reveals  a  sure  foundation  to  the  believer ;  ch.  xxxiii. 
17,  perhaps,  Messiah's  royalty,  though  from  the  connec- 
tion it  can  be  only  as  Hezekiah  might  be  deemed  Mes- 
siah's type  ;  chap.  xxxv.  gives  a  glowing  contrast  between 
the  sufferings  of  Israel  and  their  redemption.  With  chap, 
xxxv.,  close  the  Messianic  limnings  of  Isaiah  so  far  as 
they  are  found  in  the  first  division  of  his  prophecies. 
Messiah's  origin,  birth,  attributes,  reign,  and  his  benevo- 
lent sway  over  his  people,  are  thus  given  with  suflicient 
fulness  to  prepare  us  to  welcome  a  fuller  representation  of 
his  person  and  triumphs.     These  we  find  in 

ISAIAH    XL-LXVI. 

These  prophecies*  are  a  poem  or  a  series  of  poems, 
with  little  if  any  logical  connection  between  them.  With 
poetic  license,  the  prophet  ever  and  anon  leaves  the  con- 

*  Questions  of  authorship  and  date  are  not  here  considered. 


65 

secutiveness  of  his  thought  to  enlaige  upon  that  thought 
which  for  the  moment  holds  his  ecstatic  vision.  Yet 
there  are  three  leading  tojjics,  including  such  diversions 
from  them  as  the  immediate  purpose  of  the  prophet 
required,  which  are  aids  to  the  memory  when  one  desires 
to  grasp  the  substantial  contents  of  the  whole.  These  are 
indicated  by  the  similar  close  to  chapters  xlviii ;  Ivii ; 
Ixvi.     The  theme  is  "  The  promised  redemption  to 

THE  PEOPLE  OF  GOD." 

This  is  unfolded  in  the  first  division,  by  a  comforting 
comparison  between  Jehovah  and  idols,  and  between  the 
chosen  Israel  and  the  heathen,  xl.-xlviii.  The  summary 
thought  is  Jehovah's  ability  to  execute  His  purposes  in 
behalf  of  Israel,  and  His  love  for  Israel  as  prompting  Him 
to  execute  His  purpose. 

In  the  second  division,  the  theme  is  unfolded  by  a 
comparison  between  the  selected  suffering  Servant  of 
Jehovah,  and  his  subsequent  glor}^  as  indicating  the 
medium  for  the  execution  of  Jehovah's  purpose,  xlviii.- 
Ivii. 

In  the  third  division,  the  theme  is  unfolded  by  a  com- 
parison between  the  destiny,  present  and  future,  of  those 
who  welcome  the  Servant  of  Jehovah,  and  identify  them- 
selves with  Him,  and  those  who  reject  Him.     Iviii.-lxvi. 

Summarily,  Redemption  promised  ;    Redemption 

PROVIDED  FOR  ;    REDEMPTION  IN  ITS  RESULTS. 

As  the  Servant  of  Jehovah  in  his  person  and  work  is 
the  chief  Messianic  thought  of  this  portion  of  prophecy, 
and  as  critics  are  very  divergent  in  their  theories  concern- 
ing Him,  we  will  omit  the  exegesis  of  any  special  passage 
or  chapter,  and  give  a  brief  sketch  of  those  various 
theories. 

SERVANT   OF   JEHOVAH. 

1.  The  Jewish  people.  In  the  classic  passage 
(xlii.  1),  "•  Behold  my  servant:  I  will  take  hold  of  him  : 
my  chosen  One  whom  my  soul  hath  accepted ; "  the  Sept. 
inserts  '■Jacob  '  as  explanatory  of  '  servant,'  and  '  Israel '  as 
explanatory  of  'chosen  One,'  indicating  thereby  the  mean- 
ing of  the  term  '  Servant  of  Jehovah,'  in  the  opinion  of 
those  early  translators.     This  was  the  view  adopted  by 


66 

the  orthodox  Jews  of  the  12th  century,  with  the  natural 
modifications,  that  the  term  should  be  strictly  applied 
to  none  but  to  the  body  of  pious  Jews.  But  to  this 
exclusive  application  even  to  the  piqus  Jews,  it  may  be 
objected,  (a)  that  the  phrase  '  Servant  of  Jehovah,'  is  used 
by  Isaiah  in  different  senses.  In  xx.  3,  it  is  applied  to 
the  prophet  himself;  in  xxii.  20,  to  Eliakim,  son  of  Hil- 
kiah;  in  xli.  8,  9;  xliv.  1,  2,  21;  xlv.  4;  xlviii.  20,  to  the 
Jewish  people  as  a  body  or  as  the  pious  Israel,  in  xlii. 
1-7 ;  xlix.  1-9 ;  1.  5-10 ;  lii.  13-53,  to  a  divine  Legate  of 
whom  either  ideally  as  the  head  of  a  chosen  people,  or 
typically  as  the  head  of  a  body  which  includes  the  peo- 
ple of  God  universally,  certain  attributes  are  predicated, 
which  cannot  be  justly  applied  to  the  Jews  as  a  body,  to 
the  prophets  collectively,  or  to  any  one  of  them  specially. 
(J)  The  description  of  the  '  Servant  of  Jehovah  in  xlii. 
2,  3,  does  not  fit  the  character  of  the  Jewish  people,  (c) 
Usage  connects  the  phrase  '  Servant  of  Jehovah '  with  the 
verb  in  the  singular,  while  the  singular  and  plural  are 
interchanged  when  the  Jewish  people  are  personified  by 
this  term. 

2.  Cyrus.  This  theory  cannot  harmonize  with  the 
facts.  It  could  not  be  said  of  him,  "  He  shall  not  cry, 
nor  lift  up,  nor  cause  his  voice  to  be  heard  in  the  street," 
xlii.  2:  nor  "that  he  was  brought  as  a  lamb  to  the 
slaughter,'"  nor  "  for  the  transgressions  of  my  people  was 
he  smitten."  liii.  7. 

3.  The  Prophet  Isaiah.  He  is  so  called  in  xx.  3. 
The  eunuch  imagined  that  it  was  he  and  Philip  corrected 
him.  Acts  viii.  34,  35.  It  could  not  be  said  of  him  truth- 
fully, "  I  have  given  thee  to  be  the  light  of  the  nations,  to 
be  my  salvation  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,"  xlix.  6.  Nor 
could  the  vicarious  element  in  ch.  liii.  be  applied  to  him 
or  any  other  prophet. 

4.  The  Prophets  Collectively.  But  the  conversion 
of  the  Gentiles  is  never  ascribed  to  them.  The  singular 
is  used  purposely  when  this  work  is  assigned  to  the  Ser- 
vant of  Jehovah,  (xlii.  6 ;  xlix.  6.)  While  there  is  no 
interchange  of  singular  and  plurals  as  would  be  expected 
if  a  prophet  as  a  unit,  or  prophets  as  units,  of  a  body  were 
referred  to,  ch.  liii.  cannot  be  explained  in  harmony  with 


67 

this  view.     Besides,  Jewish  history  knows  little  if  any- 
thing of  a  prophetic  guild  as  a  body  ecclesiastic. 

5.  The  31essiah  par  excellenee.  This  view  corres- 
ponds with  the  language  of  Isaiah  in  certain  places,  as 
verified  by  the  New  Testament  writers. 

(a)  The  passage  xlii.  1-4,  is  quoted  in  Matt.  xii. 
17-21,  as  applicable  to  Christ. 

(5)  A  part  of  vs.  1  is  verbally  adapted  to  Christ's 
Messiahship  at  the  Jordan.     Matt.  iii.  17. 

(c)  The  testimony  of  Simeon,  Luke  ii.  32,  harmon- 
izes with  Isaiah  ix.  2 ;  xlii.  6 ;  xlix.  6 ;  Ix.  1.  2.  3. 

(d')  The  totality  of  character  pertaining  to  the  Ser- 
vant of  Jehovah  favors  this  view. 

6.  Messiah  as  a  Complex  Person^  a  representative  of 
God  among  the  nations.  This  is  the  view  of  Alexander, 
and  some  English  critics.  According  to  this  view,  some- 
times the  Servant  of  Jehovah,  and  sometimes  His  people, 
are  brought  the  more  distinctly  before  us.  The  analogy 
between  the  Servant  and  his  people  corresponds  to  the 
relation  of  Christ  as  the  Head  and  the  Church  as  his 
Body.  When  the  term  is  applicable  both  to  the  Head 
and  the  Body,  there  is  no  need  of  distinguishing  between 
them.  When  sinful  imperfection  is  implied,  the  language 
is  applicable  to  the  Body  alone.  When  absolute  sinless- 
ness  or  Divine  power  is  implied,  the  language  refers  to 
the  Head  alone,  but  may  be  considered  as  descriptive  of 
the  Body  as  far  as  the  ideal  or  design  is  concerned,  but 
not  in  reference  to  its  actual  condition.  This  theory  is 
ingenious  and  plausible,  it  covers  most  of  the  cases  where 
the  term  is  used,  when  expounded  separately.  It  makes 
too  little  account  of  the  scope  of  prophecy. 

7.  An  ideal  title  which  the  prophet  has  formed,  to 
which  he  ascribes  personality.  This  view,  on  the  whole, 
seems  to  be  the  preferable  one.  Aside  from  the  fact  that 
it  harmonizes  with  the  language  of  Isaiah  as  verified  by 
the  New  Testament  writers,  it  is  just  that  every  inspired 
writer  should  be  interpreted  by  himself.  One  of  the 
marked  characteristics  of  Isaiah  is  that,  as  he  warms  with 
his  theme,  he  passes  out  from  the  literal  into  the  ideal, 
and  from  the  ideal  to  the  personal.  Thus,  when  the  great 
liberator  looms  up  before  his  mental  horizon,  he  appears 


68 

as  a  power  bursting  forth  from  the  east  (ch.  xli.  2,  sq.), 
to  whom  nations  are  given,  and  by  whose  sword  the 
nations  are  beaten  into  dust.  Soon  he  rises  from  the 
north  and  from  the  east,  as  a  potter  treading  his  foes  in 
the  mire.  Then  he  shows  himself  in  the  full  panoply  of 
a  man,  a  shepherd,  God's  anointed,  and  Cyrus  is  his  name, 
before  whom  Jehovah  himself  goeth  to  level  the  rough 
places,  to  shiver  the  two-leaved  doors  of  brass,  and  open 
the  secret  treasures  of  surrounding  peoples,  for  the  sake 
of  his  chosen  Jacob. 

So  in  this  case  the  prophet  begins  with  the  lower  and 
and  rises  to  the  higher  theme.  He  begins  with  the  Jew- 
ish people  in  his  mind  as  the  heralds  of  the  good  news  to 
the  Gentiles :  he  ends  with  him  who  is  the  Truth,  the 
Teacher,  the  Sufferer  for  all.  Like  the  Messianic  charac- 
ter of  the  Old  Testament  as  applied  to  the  New,  we  may 
take  the  typical  character  of  what  are  termed  the  later 
prophecies  of  Isaiah  as  inclusive  of  the  chosen  people, 
and  exclusive  of  others.  The  earlier  prophecies  belong 
to  the  sphere  of  reproof  to  the  people  of  Israel  as  a  whole  ; 
the  later  especially  belong  to  the  true  Israel  as  the 
medium  of  hope  for  the  redemption  of  the  world.  And 
so  in  harmony  with  some  of  the  Psalms,  for  example  Pss. 
xxii.  and  Ixxii,  the  prophet,  under  the  full  sway  of 
inspiration,  has  before  him  the  ideal  church  of  God,  with 
Messiah  at  its  head.  Sometimes  he  speaks  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  people,  and  sometimes  from  the  stand-point 
of  Messiah  himself;  but  redemption  is  his  theme,  and  the 
working  out  of  redemption  his  design.  The  characteris- 
tics borrowed  from  inferior  and  typical  personages  have 
their  full  expression  in  the  one  grand  central  figure  to 
which  they  all  point,  "  Who,"  as  Delitzsch  says,  "  is  more 
than  a  prophet,  for  '  the  isles  wait  for  his  law,'  more  than 
a  priest,  for  he  offers  up  himself,  more  than  a  king,  for 
through  his  glory  he  makes  kings  tremble.  Not  mere 
king,  mere  prophet,  mere  priest,  is  the  Servant  of  Jeho- 
vah, who  is  none  of  these  exclusively,  but  is  all  together, 
and  they  are  only  three  emanations  of  his  glory." 

In  a  word,  the  term  is  an  ideal  which  the  prophet  has 
gathered  around  him,  to  which  ultimately  he  ascribes  true 
personality.      The  ideal  does  not  reach  its  climax  until 


69 

we  come  to  ch.  liii.,  and  was  never  actualized  until  he, 
who  was  the  Servant  of  Jehovah,  in  the  fullness  of  times, 
appears  and  gathers  around  him  the  true  Israel,  the  body 
which  is  of  Christ. 

The  salient  passages  for  this  view  are  xlii.  1-7  ;  xlix. 
1-9  ;  1.  4-10  ;  lii.  13,  to  liii.  12. 

MESSIANIC    PASSAGES    IN   THE   MINOR   PROPHETS. 

These  passages  are  not  numerous.  Aside  from 
Zechariah,  the  minor  prophets  give  little  additional 
information  as  to  the  person  of  the  Messiah  or  his  work. 
In  Hosea  iii.  5  we  liave  the  use  of  the  phrase  "David 
their  king,"  and  the  phrase  "  at  the  end  of  days,"  the  lat- 
ter in  prophetic  language  seemingly  referring  to  the  Mes- 
sianic era.  By  '•'•David  their  king  "  is  expressed  prima- 
rily a  king  of  the  house  of  David,  but  typically  their  true 
king,  Messiah.  See  Jer.  xxx.  9 ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  23-24.  In 
Hosea  xi.  1,  the  child  Israel  in  Egypt  is  used  by  Matthew 
as  typical  of  the  temporary  sojourn  of  Christ  in  Egypt. 
Matt.  ii.  14-15.  Joel  has  nothing  to  say  of  the  Messiah  as 
such,  nor  does  Amos,  though  the  former  predicts  a  pente- 
costal  descent  of  the  spirit  (Joel  ii.  28-32),  and  the  latter 
the  restoration  of  the  fallen  hut  of  the  house  of  Israel. 
Amos  ix.  11.  Obadiah  tells  us  of  "  the  kingdom  which 
shall  be  Jehovah's,"  but  that  is  all.  Oba.  i.  21.  Jonah  is 
used  as  a  type  of  our  Lord's  abode  in  the  grave  by  our 
Lord  himself.  Matt.  xii.  40.  Micah  foretells  tlie  birth- 
place of  Christ,  his  divine  nature,  the  promulgation  of 
his  mission  from  Mount  Zion  and  its  results,  and  the  uni- 
versality of  His  kingdom  as  an  echo  of  Isaiah.  Micah  v ; 
Matt.  ii.  6 ;  Micah  iv.  1-8.  Nahum's  prophecy  as  against 
Nineveh  cannot  be  expected  to  enlighten  us  as  to  the 
Messiah.  Habbakuk  embraces  his  people  in  his  arms  as  a 
mother  her  weeping  child  and  sings  his  quieting  lullaby, 
but  adds  no  new  Messianic  thought.  Zephaniah  is  the 
dies  tree  of  the  O.  T.,  yet  it  contains  a  rainbow  of  hope. 
Ch.  iii.  14-15.  Haggai  seems  to  view  the  Second  Temple, 
though  far  inferior  to  the  first,  as  the  seat  of  a  purer  wor- 
ship, and  assumes  the  identity  of  the  Second  Temple  and 
the   Church  of  the   Messianic  era.      Hag.  ii.  1-9.     But 


70 

when  we  come  to  Zechariah,  though  he  speaks  in  symbols, 
we  have  the  ripening  of  the  Messianic  idea  into  its  real 
redemptive  grandeur. 

MESSIANIC    PASSAGES   IN    ZECHARIAH. 

While  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  who  is  the  Messiah,  has 
filled  important  offices  in  the  previous  symbolisms,  it  is 
not  until  we  come  to  ch.  iii.  8,  sq.,  that  He  is  specifically 
characterized.  There  He  is  described  as  a  lowly  servant, 
under  the  term 

'  BRANCH.'  "  Hear,  I  pray,  O  Joshua  the  High  Priest, 

Thou  and  thy  colleagues  who  sit  before  thee. 
For  men  of  wonder  (or  omens)  are  they. 
For  behold,  my  servant  Branch." 

Happily  the  symbol  Branch  is  accepted  by  Jewish  exposi- 
tors and  modern  commentators  as  referring  to  the  Mes- 
siah. The  phrase,  '  My  servant,'  is  familiar  to  all  stu- 
dents of  Isaiah.  The  lowly  origin  of  this  Servant  is  indi- 
cated by  the  word  Branch.  It  is  akin  with  the  rod  which 
was  to  spring  from  the  trunk  of  the  tree  Jesse,  and  the 
shoot  which  was  to  spring  from  its  roots.  (Is.  xi.  1.)  It 
was  to  be  beautiful  and  glorious  to  the  escaped  of  Israel. 
(Is.  iv.  2.)  It  was  to  be  a  righteous  king,  executing  right- 
eousness and  judgment  in  the  earth, —  named  by  Jeremiah, 
Jehovah  our  Righteousness.  (Jer.  xxiii.  5.)  But  here, 
by  the  connection,  the  lowly  Servant  is  to  be  an  atoning 
High  Priest.  Hear,  O  Joshua,  the  High  Priest,  and  your 
colleagues  who  are  typical  signs  of  things  to  come.  For, 
lo !  I  am  bringing  forth  in  my  own  time,  my  Servant 
Branch :  and  more :  lo !  The  stone  which  I  have  placed 
before  Joshua,  upon  one  stone  are  seven  eyes.  Lo !  again, 
I  am  graving  its  graving,  and  as  the  result  I  will  remove 
the  iniquity  of  this  land  in  one  day,  or  at  once.,  and  once 
for  all.     So  runs  the  paraphrase. 

Whether  the  stone,  concerning  which  there  has  been 
so  much  wrangling  discussion,  refers  to  the  people  of 
God  as  the  foundation-stone  from  which  to  construct  the 
Temple  of  God,  or  to  the  Messiah  himself,  as  the  Chief 
Corner  Stone,  any  sound  exegesis  must  admit  that  the 
resultant  of  this  appointment  of  the  Branch  is  a  specific 


n 

atoning  work.  The  background  of  the  vision  is  the  High 
Priest,  antagonized  by  the  Adversary,  whose  hostility  is 
annulled  by  the  pardon  of  the  High  Priest  for  all  cere- 
monial defilement,  symbolized  by  the  removal  of  his  filthy 
garments,  and  the  substitution  of  the  white  sacerdotal 
attire  preparatory  for  the  work  of  the  great  day  of  atone- 
ment. He  is  thus  assigned  to  his  appropriate  station  as 
THE  RESTORER  OF  TRUE  WORSHIP ;  when  with  a  Lo !  call- 
ing attention  to  a  new  fact,  the  lowly  servant,  Branch, 
appears  in  the  vision  as  the  full  realization  of  the 
O.  T.  High  Priesthood.  And  as,  according  to  the  Tal- 
mud, the  great  day  of  atonement  being  ended,  the  High 
Priest  was  escorted  home,  and  gave  a  magnificent  feast  to 
his  friends,  while  youths  and  maidens  made  the  gardens 
and  vineyards  jocund  with  the  song  and  the  dance,  so 
this  vision  of  the  Greater  High  Priest  closes  with  the 
same  emblematic  scene,  when,  sin  pardoned,  access  to  the 
throne  of  God  secured,  because  the  Deliverer  in  the 
plenitude  of  his  grace  had  come,  each  true  Israelite  is 
represented  as  inviting  his  friends  to  partake  of  festal 
cheer  under  his  own  vine  and  fig  tree. 

The  next  Messianic  passage  is  found  in  ch.  vi.  9-15. 
It  is  not  a  vision.  The  visions  are  ended.  It  is  a  broad 
day-light  symbolical  action.  It  may  be  termed  "  The 
crowning  of  the  Branch  as  Priest  and  King."  The  pur- 
pose of  this  royal  priesthood  is  to  build  a  spiritual  temple 
to  Jehovah,  and  the  agencies  employed  are  Gentiles  and 
Jews.  Few  critics  deny  its  Messianic  import.  A  run- 
ning commentary  will  bring  out  its  main  thought.  And 
the  word  of  Jehovah  came  unto  me,  i.e.,  after  the  previ- 
ous night-visions  —  the  next  morning  or  soon  after,  the 
formula  itself  introducing  a  new  topic, —  Take  from  the 
exiles,  i.e.,  those  who  have  just  returned  from  the  exiles 
still  in  Babylon,  to  wit,  from  Cheldai,  from  Tobiah  and 
from  Jediah,  and  go  thou  on  that  day,  go  into  the  house 
of  Josiah  the  son  of  Zephaniah,  whither  they,  i.e.,  the 
three  above-named,  have  come  from  Babylon.  We  know 
nothing  especially  of  these  men  ;  but  Josiah  was  the  host, 
and  these  men  were  his  guests,  and  the  guests  had  evi- 
dently come  with  choice  gifts  to  aid  in  the  restoration  of 
Jerusalem.    And  take  silver  and  gold,  i.e.,  from  these  men 


72 

and  make  crowns^ — possibly  plural  of  dignity,  but  more 
naturally  a  composite  crown  representing  the  royal  posi- 
tion of  the  crowned  one  —  and  set  them  upon  the  head  of 
Joshua  the  son  of  Josedeck,  the  high  priest.  Not  Joshua 
and  Zerubbabel,  as  some  would  have  it,  but  upon  Joshua 
alone.  And  speak  unto  Am,  i.e.,  Joshua,  a  man  who  knew 
well  enough  that  the  high  priest  never  wore  a  crown,  and 
never  sat  on  a  throne.  His  posture  was  a  standing  pos- 
ture, as  an  interceder  for  the  people,  and  he,  therefore, 
must  have  been  aware  that  this  new  calling  was  typical 
rather  than  real.  This  fact  is  so  evident  in  history 
that  Judas  Maccabeus,  though  priest  and  warrior  and 
conqueror,  refused  until  his  very  last  days  the  proffered 
honor  of  a  crown.  Speak  unto  him,  saying,  Lo !  You 
represent  a  man  whose  well-known  name  is  Branch, —  and 
he  shall  shoot  up  from  his  place  (Ex.  x.  23),  i.e.,  not  as 
an  exotic,  but  out  of  his  own  land  and  nation,  the  native 
stock  of  whom  are  the  heirs  of  the  promises.  And  He, 
not  1/ou  nor  Zeruhhahel,  shall  build,  not  a  temple,  such  as 
you  are  erecting,  but  the  true  temple  of  Jehovah.  I  wish, 
he  says,  to  make  the  distinction  clear.  I  emphasize  the 
pronoun,  He  himself  shall  build  the  temple  of  Jehovah  in 
expectancy,  and  He  himself,  not  you,  shall  take  up  for 
himself,  and  bear  for  himself  royal  majesty  and  glory,  and 
shall  sit  upon  His  throne  with  the  dignity  of  a  king,  and 
rule  with  the  authority  of  a  Monarch.  More  than  that. 
He  shall  be  also  a  priest,  when  on  his  throne,  and  the 
counsel  which  procures  peace  shall  be  between  them  both, 
i.e.,  the  priest  and  the  hing.  Sovereignty  and  intercession 
shall  secure  reconciliation  between  God  and  all  His  exiUd 
ones. 

These  two  offices  were  never  to  be  executed  by 
Joshua.  There  would  be  nothing  remarkable  in  appoint- 
ing him  as  High  Priest.  The  priesthood  was  to  continue 
as  long  as  the  nation.  But  an  atoning  king  is  the  first 
step  towards  the  ultimate  spiritual  kingdom  which  is  to 
fill  the  whole  earth.  And  no  wonder  that  as  Haggai  saw 
the  glory  of  Jehovah  in  the  house  of  Jehovah,  he  por- 
trays the  desirable  things  of  all  nations  entering  into  its 
structure,  Zechariah  winds  up   this  prophecy  with  the 


73 

bold  statement,  "And  they  that  are  far  off" — the  Gentile 
world  — "  shall  come  and  build  in  the  Temple  of  Jehovah." 

The  next  passage  requiring  examination  is  contained 
in  cha]).  ix.  9-10.  As  it  is  in  the  disputed  portion  of  these 
prophecies,  and  as  it  describes  the  Messiah  as  a  humili- 
ated King,  it  has  been  subjected  to  sharp  criticism.  Jew 
and  rationalistic  Gentiles  have  joined  hands  in  admitting 
the  prophetic  and  Messianic  elements  in  the  prophecies 
thus  far  considered,  but  they  refuse  to  go  farther.  They 
propose  any  number  of  discordant  theories.  The  earlier 
Jewish  authorities  interpreted  the  passage  as  Messianic, 
and  Jarchi  denies  that  it  is  possible  to  interpret  it  of  any 
other  than  the  Messiah.  But  in  the  12th  century,  other 
opinions  held  sway.  Believing  that  Messiah  was  yet  to 
come,  they  quibbled  ;  some  asserting  that  if  the  Jews  were 
worthy^  he  would  come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  if 
unworthy^  as  poor  and  riding  on  an  ass.  Others  resorted 
to  a  double  Messiah,  Messiah  ben-David,  and  Messiah  ben- 
Joseph.  The  ass  was  the  trouble.  They  found  them- 
selves perpetually  tantalized  with  the  ass.  Lightfoot 
records  the  story  that  King  Sapor,  a  Persian  monarch  of 
B.C.  240,  hauglitily  addressed  a  Jewish  Rabbi  with  the 
taunt,  "  You  say  that  your  Messiah  will  come  upon  an 
ass.  I  will  send  him  a  noble  horse."  To  which  the 
Rabbi  replied,  "  You  have  not  a  horse  with  a  hundred 
colors  like  his  ass."  On  which  reply  Lightfoot  remarks, 
"  In  the  deepest  humilit}^  of  the  Messiah,  they  dream  of 
pride  even  in  His  ass."*  By  modern  critics  the  prophecy 
has  been  referred  to  Nehemiah,  who  never  was  a  king ; 
to  Judas  Maccabeus  with  as  little  show  of  reason ;  to 
Zerubbabel,  never  a  king ;  to  Simon  Maccabeus,  John 
Hyrcanus,  Uzziah  and  Hezekiah,  with  no  possible  histori- 
cal illustrations  to  sustain  them.  Their  best  tht?ory  is  the 
Messiah  to  come. 

But  the  prophecy  as  verified  in  our  Lord,  purposely 
or  not,  seems  sufficiently  clear.  "  Rejoice  exceedingly, 
Daughter  of  Zion,  shout,  Daughter  of  Jerusalem," — the 
summons  to  a  fresh  prophecy — "Behold  thy  king  cometh 
for  thy  good."  '■'- Just :"  no  guile  found  in  his  mouth: 
"  saved :  "  not  bringing  salvation,  but  preserved  in  his  mis- 

*Lightfoot's  Works,  vol.  11,  chap.  31. 


74 

sion,  so  that  even  the  bands  of  death  cannot  hold  him  : 
"  afflicted :  "  not  meek,  but  a  soul-sufferer  as  the  word  gen 
erally  signifies  elsewhere ;  "and  riding  upon  an  ass,  to  wit 
the  colt  of  an  ass  : ''  an  emblem  of  humiliation  rather  than 
of  kingly  exaltation.  He  is  a  sovereign  unlike  other  sove- 
reigns. He  is  an  afflicted  sovereign.  Royal  personages 
may  have  used  such  an  animal  prior  to  the  days  of  Solo- 
mon. But  the  forbidden  horse  was  used  for  state  occa- 
sions subsequently.  (Jer.  xvii.  25.)  In  the  prophet's 
time,  and  in  the  time  of  Christ,  the  horse  was  the  pride  of 
kings.  But  this  one,  without  pomp,  without  splendor,  is 
totally  unlike  the  expected  Messiah,  and  his  coronation- 
day  was  to  crown  him  as  the  crowned  sufferer.  Even  the 
unridden  young  ass  seems  to  emphasize  this  fact.  To  ride 
not  upon  a  horse,  not  upon  a  trained  ass,  but  upon  an 
untrained  colt,  so  accurately  verified,  betokens  lowliness 
and  humiliation.  And  possibly  we  may  go  as  far  as 
Kohler,  who  says,  "  That  inasmuch  as  all  animals  devoted 
to  the  service  of  Jehovah  were  not  to  be  used  in  the  ser- 
vice of  man,  the  selected  animal  in  this  case  indicates  the 
separateness  of  the  sufering  Messiah  to  the  sacred  service 
of  Jehovah."  Such  a  one  is  he  who  comes  to  slay  his 
enemies  by  the  breath  of  his  mouth. 

Passing  ch.  xi.,  the  obscurest  of  all,  where  seemingly 
under  the  guise  of  a  symbolical  action,  the  prophet 
impersonating  not  Messiah,  but  Jehovah  as  the  Good 
Shepherd,  who  is  rejected,  as  was  Christ  by  the  traitor- 
ship  of  Judas,  we  come  to  the  noted  prophecy  in  chap, 
xii.  10-12,  "And  1  will  pour  upon  the  house  of  David  the 
spirit  of  grace  and  supplication  ;  and  they  shall  look  unto 
me  whom  they  have  pierced,  and  they  shall  mourn  over 
him,  as  one  who  is  bitter  (in  grief)  over  the  first-born." 
The  crucial  phrase  in  this  passage  is,  "And  they  shall 
look  unto  me,  whom  they  have  pierced."  This  is  the 
exact  rendering  of  the  original  text  so  far  as  it  has  been 
ascertained  by  a  careful  collation  of  the  existing  Mss. 
All  the  versions  sustain  it,  except  the  Sept.,  which, 
according  to  its  usual  treatment  of  an  anthropomorphic 
passage,  softens  the  word  '  pierced '  into  '  insulted.'  The 
verb  "  to  pierce  "  is  never  elsewhere  used  with  any  other 
meaning.     The  person  pierced,  according  to  the  connec- 


75 

tion,  is  not  the  prophet,  nor  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  but 
Jehovah  himself,  who  is  the  speaker  throughout  the  sec- 
tion. John  in  quoting  it,  as  verified,  in  part  at  least,  by 
the  centurion's  spear,  uses  the  language  of  the  Hebrew 
text,  instead  of  that  of  the  Sept.,  with  the  exception  of 
the  substitution  of  the  pronoun  him  for  me,  which  may  be 
merely  expository.  He  seems  to  be  almost  nervously 
eager,  by  the  assurance  of  personally  witnessing  the 
scene,  to  convince  his  readers  that  then  and  there  the 
utterance  of  Zechariah  was  fulfilled.  And  this  eagerness 
is  not  perhaps  to  be  wondered  at,  for  candor  compels  the 
admission  that  unless  the  word  Jehovah  is  a  synonym  for 
the  Messiah,  for  which  as  yet  we  have  found  no  sufficient 
evidence,  it  is  the  revealing,  covenant-keeping  God,  and 
not  the  intervening  Servant  of  Jehovah,  who  is  here  said 
to  be  pierced.  What  idea  tliat  assertion  w^ould  convey  to 
Zechariah,  or  to  his  hearers  and  readers,  it  is  impossible 
to  determine.  A  prophec}'  may  contain  much  more  than 
its  surface-impression  upon  the  prophet  or  the  people 
whom  he  addresses,  but  it  must  contain  some  idea  of 
value  to,  and  capable  of  appreciation  by  both  prophet  and 
})eople.  A  pierced  prophet  of  Jehovah,  or  a  pierced 
Angel  of  Jehovah  might  have  been  understood  by  the 
men  of  O.  T.  times,  but  a  })ierced  God  was  a  thought  from 
which  they  would  have  recoiled.  And  the  marvel  is,  that 
the  stern,  religious  Jew  allowed  the  "  unto  me  "  to  remain 
in  the  text.  The  K'ri,  it  is  true,  in  some  Mss.,  reads 
"  unto  him  ; "  but  they  are  a  late  authority.  The  Chris- 
tian who  is  convinced  of  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  niay 
admit  that  Jehovah  and  the  Servant  of  Jehovah  are  one, 
and  thus  escape  the  difficulty,  but,  regarded  from  the 
stand-point  of  the  prophet,  it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that 
Jew  and  Gentile  have  sought  to  escape  the  thought  of  a 
pierced  Grod.  Even  Calvin  chose  the  parap4irase  of  the 
Sept.,  and  says,  "  The  piercing  must  be  accepted  as  a 
metaphorical  expression  for  a  perpetual  irritation,"  and 
denies  its  verification  in  the  crucifixion  of  Christ.  And 
the  whole  school  of  rationalists,  echoed  by  the  Jews, 
shouts,  "  Good  for  old  Calvin.'"  Their  thunder  is  small 
thunder,  however,  for  in  his  commentary  on  the  passage 
in  John,  he  urges  his  interpretation  as  a  proof  tliat  Christ 


76 

was  God.  Of  course,  the  difficulty  may  be  removed  by 
changing  the  text,  or  by  putting  something  into  the  text. 
Some  change  the  verb  and  read  "leap  up  unto  me,  and 
mourn,'''  but  we  have  no  parallel  example.  Others  read, 
"  They  have  pierced  the  heroes  and  martyrs,  and  mourn 
on  account  of  their  persecution."  But  there  is  no 
authority  for  such  a  paraphrase.  Others  read,  "  They 
shall  look  up  to  me  with  respect  to  each  one  whom  they 
have  pierced,"  i.e.,  Jew  mourning  for  the  Jew  whom  he 
has  martyred,  an  expression  too  incongruous  to  require 
refutation.  No  solution  offered  by  these  critics  is  satis- 
factory, and  until  more  light  shines  upon  the  expression, 
it  is  a  pierced  Jehovah  to  whom  the  prophet  refers.  That 
it  is  Messianic  in  thought  is  evident  from  the  connection 
between  this  prophecy  and  the  previous  one.  The  rejected 
shepherd  who  was  then  the  prophet  or  Jehovah,  is  here 
the  pierced  Jehovah.  Wunsche  in  a  monograph  on  "TAe 
Sufferings  of  Messiah,^''  a  work  which  deserves  translation 
for  polemical  purposes,  cites  two  passages  as  evidence  that 
the  theory  of  two  Messiahs  appeared  shortly  after  the 
Christian  era,  founded  upon  this  passage,  and  became  the 
teaching  of  the  early  synagogue.  The  Jerusalem-Gemara 
(A.D.  230-290)  referring  to  this  text,  says,  that  there  were 
among  the  Rabbins  two  opinions ;  one  says,  that  which 
they  (the  people)  mourn  is  the  Messiah ;  and  the  other, 
that  which  they  mourn  is  evil  desire,  (original  sin).  In 
the  Babylonian  Gemara  (A.D.  350-500),  the  question  is 
put,  "  What  is  the  cause  of  this  mourning  ?  In  this  the 
Rabbins  differ.  The  one  said,  It  was  for  Messiah  ben- 
Joseph  who  was  slain ;  and  the  other  said.  It  was  for  evil 
desire  (original  sin),  which  is  to  be  slain ;  for  it  is  writ- 
ten, 'And  they  shall  look  unto  him  whom  they  have 
pierced.'  "By  a  fair  and  quite  complete  classification  of 
the  non-controversial  writings  of  the  Jews,  Wunsche 
shows  that  the  idea  of  a  suffering,  atoning  Messiah  was 
the  ordinary  teaching  of  the  early  synagogue.  And,  as 
Wright  saj's,  "  It  is  natural  enough  that  the  modern 
sj^nagogue  should  have  changed  its  views  on  these  points, 
but  it  is  not  fair  that  attempts  should  be  made  to  silence 
or  misrepresent  on  such  points  the  testimony  of  the  older 


17 

Jewish  authorities," — a  criticism  worthy  of  regard  by 
Drumraond,  the  author  of  The  Jewish  Messiah. 

The  last  passage  to  be  noticed  is  ch.  xiii.  7 :  "Awake 
O  sword  against  my  Shepherd,  and  against  a  strong  man, 
my  fellow,  saith  Jehovah  of  Hosts.  Smite  the  shepherd, 
and  the  sheep  shall  be  scattered.  And  I  will  stretch  out 
my  hand  for  the  benefit  of  ray  little  ones."  Like  all  the 
others  it  is  a  dramatic  burst  from  an  obscure  connection. 
We  are  startled  by  it  and  put  to  the  strain  to  ascertain  its 
meaning.  Here  the  prophet  seems  to  go  back  upon  him- 
self. He  had  slain  the  Messiah.  Was  not  that  enough  ? 
Ho!  He  turns  us  to  the  slayer, — Jehovah  of  Hosts.  And 
this  constitutes  the  climax  of  all  he  has  to  say.  There  is 
a  divine  agency  in  the  death  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  per- 
haps explaining  more  clearly  the  term  Good  Shepherd  in 
the  previous  chapters,  and  the  fruit  of  this  agency  is  the 
scattering  of  the  sheep,  and  the  rescue  of  the  chosen  little 
flock. 

There  is  strictly  no  difficulty  in  the  words  them- 
selves to  do  away  with  the  evangelical  interpretation  of 
this  passage.  A  fair  comparison  of  it  with  cognate  pas* 
sages,  especially  Isaiah  (ch.  liii.),  and  the  quotation  of  it 
by  our  Lord,  emphasizes  its  meaning  as  expressed  by 
Peter,  "  This  man,  delivered  up  according  to  the  estab- 
lished counsel  and  fore-knowledge  of  God,  ye  slew,  cruci- 
fying him  by  the  hands  of  lawless  ones." 

The  thread  we  have  thus  tried  to  follow  carefully  and 
candidly,  traces  for  us  a  Messiah  as  a  lowly  servant.,  a 
Messiah  as  Priest-King,  a  Messiah  as  an  afflicted  humili- 
ated Monarch.,  a  Messiah  betrayed  and  rejected,  a  Messiah 
slain,  a  Messiah  slain  under  the  agency  of  Jehovah  himself. 

THE   ANGEL   OF   JEHOVAH. 

Malachi,  the  last  of  the  prophets,  speaking  for  Jeho- 
vah, says,  "  Behold  I  am  sending  my  messenger,  and  he 
will  prepare  a  way  before  me ;  and  suddenly  (unexpect- 
edly), will  come  unto  His  Temple,  the  Lord  whom  ye  are 
seeking ;  even  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant,  whom  ye  are 
delighting  in ;  behold  he  has  come,  (or  is  coming,)  saith 
Jehovah  of  Hosts."     Mai.  iii.  1. 


t8 

This  Angel  of  the  Covenant,  to  whom  the  divine 
epithet,  '  the  Lord,'  is  applied  in  the  previous  clause,  is 
evidently  the  same  person  who  is  elsewhere  called  'the 
Angel  of  God,'  'the  Angel  of  Jehovah,'  "the  Mediator 
between  God  and  man  in  all  God's  communications  and 
dealings  with  men  : "  i.e.,  in  the  O.  T.  In  Isa.  Ixiii.  9, 
He  is  called  "  The  Angel  of  his  Presence,"  or  face.,  where 
there  is  an  allusion  to  Exodus  xxxiii.  14-15. 

Collating  this  passage  with  Mai.  iv.  5-6,  and  the  use 
made  of  them  by  the  writers  of  the  N.  T.,  the  Angel  of 
the  Covenant  corresponds  to  Christ,  and  the  Elijah  who 
was  to  make  a  way  ready  for  Him,  is  John  the  Baptist. 
Matt.  xi.  10-15 ;  Mark  i.  2-8 ;  Luke,  vii.  27-29. 

Note.  1.  By  '  the  Angel  of  the  Covenant '  is  evidently 
meant  the  old  covenant,  corresponding  to  the  Angel  of 
Jehovah  elsewhere  referred  to  in  the  O.  T.  He  does  not 
appear  in  the  N.  T.,  a  silence  significant  of  the  apparent 
fact  that  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  in  the  O.  T.,  is  no  other 
than  the  Christ  of  the  N.  T. 

Note  2.  My  friend.  Professor  C.  Goodspeed,  in  a  very 
able  article  (Bib.  Sac.  vol.  36),  after  an  examination  of 
the  passages  in  which  the  phrase,  'Angel  of  Jehovah,'  and 
'Angel  of  God '  is  employed,  summarizes  his  conclusion  as 
to  the  divinity  of  this  person  as  follows: — 1.  "He  fre- 
quently applies  to  himself  the  name  Elohim  and  Jehovah, 
and  declares  that  the  name,  '  I  am  that  I  am '  was  to  be 
his  name  to  all  generations.  2.  Whenever  he  speaks  to 
men  he  speaks  with  absolute  and  independent  authority, 
assuming  to  himself  prerogatives  inconsistent  with  the 
pretensions  of  any  other  than  a  divine  person. 

3.  He  exacts  from  men  divine  honor,  worship,  and 
sacrifice.  4.  Scripture  writgrs  designate  him  by  the 
divine  names  Elohim  and  Jehovah."  His  closing  sen- 
tence is  worth}^  of  reverent  consideration.  "  If  our  con- 
clusion is  correct,  and  Christ  and  the  Angel  of  Jehovah 
are  one,  then,  we  repeat,  the  incarnation  of  Deity,  the 
preexistence  of  our  Lord,  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  and  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  —  carrying  with  them,  as  they  do, 
the  whole  superstructure  of  apostolic  teaching  —  are  not 
exclusively  of  New  Testament  growth,  but  strike  their 
roots  down  through  all  inspired  teaching  to  the  beginning 


79 

of  the  world,  thus  binding  all  revelation  together  in  a 
complete  unity,  in  a  progressive  and  harmonious  whole." 
Passages  for  consultation  on  the  Angel  of  Jehovah 
are  Gen.  xvi.  7-14 ;  xviii.  1  sq.;  xxii.  11  sq.;  xxxi.  11  sq.; 
xxxii.  1,  and  Hos.  xii.  4  sq. ;  Ex.  iii.  2  sq. ;  xiv.  19  and  24  ; 
xxiii.  20-23 :  xxxiii.  14 ;  Num.  xxii.  35 ;  xxiii.  6 ;  Josh, 
iii.  13-15 ;  Judges  ii.  1 ;  vi.  11  sq. ;  xiii.  3  sq. ;  I.  Kings 
xix.  4-15  ;  Zech.  iii.  1 ;  xii.  8. 

MESSIANIC    PASSAGES   IN   DANIEL. 

These  are  chs.  ii.  34-35  ;  vii.  13-14 ;  ix.  24-27.  They 
require  a  fuller  exegesis  than  our  limits  allow.  See  for 
literature,  Lange's  (Zoekler)  Introduction  to  the  Prophet 
DanieU  §  12.  Also  Old  Testament  Prophecy,  by  Stanley 
Leathes  in  reply  to  Kuenen. 

CONCLUSION. 

The  object  of  this  Syllabus  is  simply  to  place  in  the 
hands  of  the  student  the  material,  with  cursory  sugges- 
tions, by  which  he  may  work  out  for  himself  the  Messi- 
anic idea  as  it  appears  in  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. To  me,  the  one  word  DELIVERER  expresses  it, 
when  the  several  passages  are  grouped  and  condensed 
into  their  true  significance.  Mediation  is  the  red  vital  line 
running  through  Old  Testament  prophecy,  connecting  the 
Protevangelium  with  the  Sufferer  on  Calvary.  The 
Angel  of  the  Israelites,  the  King  of  the  Psalmists,  the 
Teacher  of  the  Prophets,  the  Priest-King  of  Zechariah, 
find  their  central  purpose  in  Isaiah  Fifty  three,  and  its 
sublime  realization  is  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  John. 
"  The  one  believing  will  not  make  haste  ;  "  or  "  give  way." 
Cheyne.  Isa.  xxviii.  16.  "  Prove  all  things :  hold  fast 
that  which  is  good^''     I  Thess.  v.  21. 


DATE  DUE 


